3 ms·

I still don't understand why Nokia are trolling Google so hard on this stuff. Gee, why doesn't Google give away for free their algorithm or Adwords secrets? Wh

I still don't understand why Nokia are trolling Google so hard on this stuff. Gee, why doesn't Google give away for free their algorithm or Adwords secrets? Why should they, should be the question. Every company has an obligation to, with all other things considered, make as much cash as possible for their shareholders. Who cares that you think that everyone should bow to Google or Microsoft or ...?

georgemcbay 14y ago
A more fitting analogy would be: "Gee, why doesn't Google not sue people who created their own MapReduce (which Google has a number of patents on) implementations?" Of course the problem with that is they don't sue others who use MapReduce, because while they aren't perfect, Google is pretty good about not abusing the legal system (unlike quite a few tech companies I could name).
- OGinparadise 14y ago
  If Nokia was making $60billion in revenue and $12 Billion in profits, like Google, than maybe. Bottom line is that every company has to do what is best for them, no go along because another one said so. Since things at Nokia aren't going as well, patents might been as having a higher priority. Nokia and others have spent decades inventing stuff about phones. Google is doing this because they see something in it for themselves, make no mistake. The true intention will show a few years down the line.
toyg 14y ago
VP8 is really not part of Nokia's core-business. Nokia's core business is making great, portable telecom hardware; a video codec they don't even use right now is not an essential part of it. In fact, it's not even a whole codec spec -- the actual patents are a bunch of implementation-specific tricks that can probably be coded around, if necessary. They make no money from these patents today and will likely never make any money at all; they've been left dormant for 8 years! No, this is not a real industrial strategy nor "maximizing value for shareholders"; on the face of it, this is just gratuitous trolling of a competitor. It's incredibly sad and really, really unclassy, hence my struggle to understand why they're doing this. However, plenty of people seem to think it's an acceptable move to "disrupt a competitor", so hey.

georgemcbay 14y ago

A more fitting analogy would be: "Gee, why doesn't Google not sue people who created their own MapReduce (which Google has a number of patents on) implementations?" Of course the problem with that is they don't sue others who use MapReduce, because while they aren't perfect, Google is pretty good about not abusing the legal system (unlike quite a few tech companies I could name).

OGinparadise 14y ago
If Nokia was making $60billion in revenue and $12 Billion in profits, like Google, than maybe. Bottom line is that every company has to do what is best for them, no go along because another one said so. Since things at Nokia aren't going as well, patents might been as having a higher priority. Nokia and others have spent decades inventing stuff about phones. Google is doing this because they see something in it for themselves, make no mistake. The true intention will show a few years down the line.

toyg 14y ago

VP8 is really not part of Nokia's core-business. Nokia's core business is making great, portable telecom hardware; a video codec they don't even use right now is not an essential part of it. In fact, it's not even a whole codec spec -- the actual patents are a bunch of implementation-specific tricks that can probably be coded around, if necessary. They make no money from these patents today and will likely never make any money at all; they've been left dormant for 8 years! No, this is not a real industrial strategy nor "maximizing value for shareholders"; on the face of it, this is just gratuitous trolling of a competitor. It's incredibly sad and really, really unclassy, hence my struggle to understand why they're doing this. However, plenty of people seem to think it's an acceptable move to "disrupt a competitor", so hey.