20 ms·
Patent war goes nuclear: Microsoft, Apple-owned “Rockstar” sues Google
- grej 13y agoThe patent system has been out of hand for a while but the big corporations haven't complained too much about it because having huge patent portfolios themselves allowed them to build a virtual moat around their business units. If things go nuclear and they start hemorrhaging even more legal fees, they may begin to exert more pressure to change the system. Given some of the recent proposed legislation, hopefully the tide is turning against filing patent lawsuits as a business model.
- ScottBurson 13y agoI don't think any of the recent proposed legislation is intended to address a situation like this, where all the players are large companies with deep pockets.
- grej 13y agoGood point. Although this particular case highlights one of the key problems in the entire system. Shell corporations with very little assets are established as the suing entity in order to shield the much larger and wealthier owners from any counter-suit liability. If that aspect of the current system were changed and you could pierce the shell corp to get at the real beneficiaries, it would alter the landscape for these cases significantly.
- xerophtye 13y agoWill you please enlighten me on how these shell corporations are used? i thought they existed to avoid negative PR
- plumeria 13y agoEasy people, just don't buy Apple / M$ products! They are trying to stop innovation...
- ekianjo 13y agoYeah, that's the right thing to do. Punish the ones who use Patents to attack other companies.
- 37prime 13y agoSo you’d punish Google too? Edit: Cached version instead of the bloodsucking WSJ paywalled version. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zoneG32AVw0J:online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203806504577183433184318046+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zoneG32...
- curveship 13y agoYou realize that suit was from before the two companies merged.
- 37prime 13y agoThe suit was filed after google struck the deal to buy Motorola, but not officially finalized. Google announced Motorola Mobility acquisition in 2011. The suit was filed in 2012.
- 6thSigma 13y agoI believe they were still seeking regulatory approval of the acquisition when the lawsuit was filed. Either way, Apple sued Motorola first in 2011.
- 37prime 13y agoAny quotes on that? Apple sued Motorola (2012) http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/10/apple-sues-motorola-over-qualcomm-license-makes-us-dream-of-a-w/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/10/apple-sues-motorola-over-... Motorola Sued Apple (2011) http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/12/motorola-wins-injunction-against-apple-could-spell-trouble-for-eu-sales/ http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/12/motorola-wins-injunctio...
- slantyyz 13y agoI wonder... If Google were to pony up the cash to buy RIM, wouldn't this lawsuit go away?
- grej 13y agoI would think this will definitely increase Google's interest in RIM and its patent arsenal.
- raldi 13y agoRIM is a co-owner of Rockstar.
- plumeria 13y agoEven better, then.
- grej 13y agoHa. Didn't catch that! I wonder what percentage. Google could get some percentage of any potential judgement against themselves by buying RIM. It's like the M&A version of an option spread play.
- adventured 13y agoI suspect all parties to the Rockstar trove have equal rights to the patents (and unequal royalties). Buying RIM would make the lawsuit null and void, unless RIM agreed that their rights can't be assigned (eg to Google) upon purchase etc. Anyone have more knowledge on Rockstar and know how this would all work?
- cromwellian 13y agoI thought it was impossible to be more of a douchebag than Intellectual Ventures, but apparently, there's a new winner in town. It was obvious when the Rockstar bid won and you looked at who made up the group, what was going to happen. I used to get really angry and outraged when reading stories like this, but now I'm just resigned. Patent reform isn't going to happen and this kind of predatory and unethical abuse of the system by sharks and parasites will continue as the cost of doing business. One can only hope for karmic retribution one day.
- alwaysinshade 13y ago"I thought it was impossible to be more of a douchebag than Intellectual Ventures, but apparently, there's a new winner in town." What Rockstar is doing is very shitty, but IV takes the cake because they're a non-practicing entity. It's one thing to sue competitors for making products similar to your own, it's another to make no products and sue people who dare to make something vaguely encroaching your vaguely defined patent.
- oniTony 13y agoBut that's exactly what Rockstar does. From the article: > Part of the company's strategy is avoiding a patent-countersuit by not having any operating businesses. Essentially, Rockstar wants to enjoy the same advantage patent trolls have, even though it's owned by direct Google competitors like Apple and Microsoft.
- alwaysinshade 13y ago"But that's exactly what Rockstar does" Rockstar acts as a firewall, sure, but the parent companies make things. IV made a mosquito-killing laser that no one could buy, then allegedly got down to business by flicking individual patents to shell LLCs and suing indie app developers for using iOS's in-app-purchase APIs. Classy.
- zmmmmm 13y agoI think RockStar is even worse because they are an NPE that is a sham front set up to further the anticompetitive business interests of two of the largest and most dominant companies on the planet. That's all the evil of a patent troll plus extra ...
- leeoniya 13y agoi know this will get downvoted, and i've avoided doing this until now, but it's just too appropriate here http://images.wikia.com/random-ness/images/3/34/Michael_Jackson_popcorn.gif http://images.wikia.com/random-ness/images/3/34/Michael_Jack...
- unimpressive 13y agoIf you must post a gif, you could at least add to the conversation first. And no, predicting your karma decrease doesn't count.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- rurounijones 13y ago'One patent filed in 1997, for a "navigation tool for graphical user interface," describes a way of navigating through electronic documents. Another describes an "Internet protocol filter," and a third patent describes an "integrated message center."' Well with earth-shaking innovative patents like that I hope they succeed. I would never have thought of an integrated message center for anything.
- grej 13y ago...a third patent describes an "integrated message center." This is just comically ridiculous. The only benefit to Google being the target of this suit is that if it goes all the way, there is a chance that some of these might be invalidated because at least they have the cash reserves to stand and fight (if they choose to do so).
- axman6 13y agoHave you read the patent?
- axman6 13y agoreads half line description which outlines not a single important feature of the patent Yep, obviously these are shippy patents, I better not read them! What a joke, this is why I always get angry when reading anything about patents on HN, everyone is so uneducated and seemingly proud of it.
- rurounijones 13y agoI actually used to read patents when they came up in the news (as much as I could understand them anyway, patent English is, ironically, not the clearest language). However having done so quite a few times with tech patents and finding them to be pathetically simple / obvious (Or unintelligible due to the cryptic patentese) I am now jaded enough that I do dismiss them. Should I? Probably not, I am sure there are a few diamonds that I have dismissed, however I am pretty confident that statistically I am not missing much. [EDIT] Just went through https://www.google.com/patents/US6037937 https://www.google.com/patents/US6037937 quickly ... it has not changed my opinion.
- aspensmonster 13y agoPlease, make it stop. Make it stop. Stop. Stop. Stop. STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP. How many billions of dollars are these companies going to flush down the drain on legal fees that could be better spent doing just about anything else? >When Wired visited Rockstar's Ontario headquarters, it found 10 reverse-engineering experts, working daily to take apart products and find patent infringement. >With just a few dozen employees, Rockstar is hoping to convince more than 100 technology companies to pay it patent licensing fees for a huge array of products. "Pretty much anyone out there is infringing," said Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi. Oh fuck these guys.
- ulfw 13y agoIt's how America runs. Have you asked a doctor how much he pays for legal fees/malpractise insurance? It's the laywers who run this place
- ac29 13y agoMalpractice insurance is probably way cheaper than you think: http://truecostofhealthcare.org/malpractice http://truecostofhealthcare.org/malpractice A few thousand a year. Its a common misconception that its expensive, or plays more than a tiny role in the cost of health care.
- Apocryphon 13y agoPretty sure the untaxable offshore holdings of all of these guys are a drop in the bucket in legal fees. This is just a sideshow.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- shmerl 13y agoGoogle should sue them for racket or find some other way to smash these trolls down.
- monsterix 13y ago> racket That's an interesting choice of word!
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- leeoniya 13y agoand i suppose Amazon "went nuclear" against Apple by selling the Kindle at cost? apparently that's what it takes just to enter these dominated markets. which is more than just a little scary.
- bad_user 13y agoReleasing a cheaper product is just free market competition. Suing for patents is abusing a government granted monopoly.
- neya 13y agoSo, you're saying that a company deserves to be sued if it makes a product that was previously unaffordable for the masses, affordable? That's totally being an elitist (and in a way discriminatory). Not that I'm outraged with your comment, I just think that everyone having access to technology is only a good thing and it is actual progress by itself.
- bpodgursky 13y agoI know it's been said before, but to reiterate: outrage doesn't help anything, but buying products from these companies DOES hurt. If you're truly outraged enough to want to take action, take action - writing to your representatives - donating to the EFF or other organizations - by not donating another $2k to Apple for a new Mac*, implicitly endorsing these bullshit tactics - not developing for those platforms (App Store, etc) Leaving comments here expressing outrage isn't really helping.
- ekianjo 13y ago"Don't buy Macs" is not going to work well around here. Most HNers develop software on Mac and see it as the ideal development platform. I'd say they don't care about what Apple does (it's not the first time Apple does that either).
- throwaway98604 13y agoI'm honestly starting to regret choosing to learn Objective-C now. I am seriously considering learning Android development and ditching my Macbook / iPhone for a Nexus 5 and some sort of linux distro. People like me are making this whole situation significantly worse by contributing software to Apple's platform.
- ekianjo 13y agoGood thing you realize it now. Better now than later. Do take action if you are serious about the philosophical implications of your work. Anyway, we can see that even in the absence of Steve Jobs, Apple is certainly serious about "going nuclear on Android". They'll follow their former leader's thinking even beyond the grave. That's sad.
- serge2k 13y agoProbably because they can see what happened with PCs happening again. If they don't fight android with everything they have now then in 5 or 10 years they might not have the chance.
- beautybasics 13y ago- They are just accruing debt with their actions - Their time will come and when it does it will be painful. - Any system that's inherently corrupt is bound to collapse.
- jmhain 13y ago> Any system that's inherently corrupt is bound to collapse. I don't really believe this, but it'd make me very happy if you could prove me wrong.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- prawn 13y ago"Google bid for the patents, but didn't get them. Instead, they went to a group of competitors—Microsoft, Apple, RIM, Ericsson, and Sony—operating under the name "Rockstar Bidco."" I feel like with those initials, they could've operated as "REAMS" instead. From Wiktionary, ream: "(slang, vulgar) To sexually penetrate in a rough and painful way..."
- beedogs 13y agoI really wish they'd just nullify any patent granted that involves "doing something commonplace ON THE INTERNET!!!", as if adding a tcp/ip connection is something truly inventive or novel. Christ, this is getting out of hand.
- mythz 13y agoWhat really sucks is how established multi-billion dollar companies are able to oppress smaller innovative ones from competing by simply using their cash war-chest to buy-up broad patent mine-fields around them. It especially sucks this is being done to stifle the momentum of one of the highest-growth markets the world has ever seen. Patents were meant to protect the innovator, instead software patents are being used to legally harm competition they can't compete against technically - hurting everyone except the status-quo.
- chroem 13y agoIt's not just software patents, it's all patents. The current 3D printing technologies making a big splash right now were all invented in the 80's. The patent minefield just beginning to expire is what's causing the 3D printing boom.
- waqf 13y agocitation?
- bsdetector 13y agoSmall companies that have done something new aren't buried six feet under a lawsuit, they are bought out and become Google YouTube, or Google Maps, or Google Blogger. Yes they may be forced to sell or sell for less to avoid patent lawsuits against them, but they sell for more than if they didn't have any patents themselves. It isn't an idea situation, but patents still generate a ton of income for small inventors.
- Goronmon 13y agoIt isn't an idea situation, but patents still generate a ton of income for small inventors. But is this income generated for a good reason or just because ..."patents"? Are these small companies getting paid because of the good work they've done or because they've managed to fake enough to get some patents useful in a war-chest of patents for a larger company down the road?
- 37prime 13y agoFrank Shaw of Microsoft revealed that Google was invited to jointly bid Nortel’s Patent Portfolio but declined. http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/03/microsoft-just-kicked-google-in-the-nuts/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/03/microsoft-just-kicked-googl... http://technologizer.com/2011/08/04/google-shows-how-not-to-complain-about-the-patent-mess/ http://technologizer.com/2011/08/04/google-shows-how-not-to-... Take everything with at least a boulder of salt before turning to an emotional being.
- randomfool 13y agoBy invitation, was it "Join us in suing others, or we'll sue you?"
- grej 13y agoindeed. Sounds more like extorted than invited at first glance.
- mortale 13y agoThat is microsoft's story, however if I recall correctly, if google were to have bid with the others, the deal was structured such that they couldn't protect android partners. So the lawsuits against android would happen anyway with the difference being google sponsoring the patent trolling against its own android OEMs. But yeah, "invited".
- DigitalSea 13y agoWow, what a dog move. The fact they're using Google's attempt to bid for the patents originally against them is even worse. If this isn't justification for serious patent reform, I don't know what is. The fact the consortium that owns the patents is comprised of Google's main competitors in many spaces should immediately ring alarm bells for any judge. This move surely must be anti-competitive, I hope Google fights this all of the way to the top (they've got enough cash).
- randomhunt 13y ago> The fact they're using Google's attempt to bid for the patents originally against them is even worse That's just lawyering 101...it's a very common thing to do to try and add "weight" to your arguments is to say the opposition was aware of the "value"
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- FridayWithJohn 13y agoI'm busy reading "The Masters of Doom". Here is a little snippet all about patents with one of the world's best developers of all time, John Carmack. "Carmack turned red. “If you ever ask me to patent anything,” he snapped, “I’ll quit.” Al assumed Carmack was trying to protect his own financial interests, but in reality he had struck what was an increasingly raw nerve for the young, idealistic programmer. It was one of the few things that could truly make him angry. It was ingrained in his bones since his first reading of the Hacker Ethic." As a developer there is nothing more destructive than to be be told you can't do that... it is similar to what I did. Could you imagine what would happen if someone put a patient on breathing?
- FridayWithJohn 13y agoI'm busy reading "The Masters of Doom". Here is a little snippet all about patents with one of the world's best developers of all time, John Carmack. "Carmack turned red. “If you ever ask me to patent anything,” he snapped, “I’ll quit.” Al assumed Carmack was trying to protect his own financial interests, but in reality he had struck what was an increasingly raw nerve for the young, idealistic programmer. It was one of the few things that could truly make him angry. It was ingrained in his bones since his first reading of the Hacker Ethic." As a developer there is nothing more destructive than to be be told you can't do that... it is similar to what I did. Could you imagine what would happen if someone put a patient on breathing?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- grej 13y agoYou have to wonder what Microsoft's goal is here, given that some estimates have them earning over $3B/yr in licensing fees on Android sales.
- mayhew 13y agoLocking people into their mobile ecosystem is probably worth way more then that in the long term. That's what these companies are all about, after all.
- eggged 13y agoNewegg can help...contact our legal counsel... don't feed patent trolls...http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/how-newegg-crushed-the-shopping-cart-patent-and-saved-online-retail/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/how-newegg-crushe...
- guelo 13y agoIn a just world Apple and Microsoft lose out on enough idealistic brilliant engineers over this that over time they decline and die.
- pg 13y agoIt's a little early to say for sure, but I predict this will do more to hurt Apple's reputation in the tech community than anything they've done before. And that is not a good community to alienate. I would not be surprised if they look back on this move one day and feel that they ended up net worse off as a result. Apple used to be careful not to alienate hackers. And Microsoft has been gradually digging itself out of a hole in that respect for several years. Now in my mind they are both the enemy.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- pinaceae 13y agoGoogle threw the gauntlet when it took a billion dollar investment into a mobile OS and gave it away for free. these dumping tactics ruined the market for licensed OS like Windows. did anybody truly believe the rest of the software industry would take it up the ass from google without fighting back? bing, apple maps, patents, etc - all part of the war. how much money does MS already make off android due to lost patents? blaming a single player in this game is ridiculous. schmidt in apple's board was the ultimate insult.
- pedalpete 13y agoIt's called strategy, and from Google's standpoint, it's a brilliant one. Seems to be working very well for them, while keeping competitors at bay. With regards to Schmidt on Apple's board, you're not the first to mention it here, as I responded to another comment, Apple was really dumb in this instance. Google bought Android in 2005, Apple brought Eric Schmidt onto it's board in 2006. So, either Apple was hoping to get some insight into what Google was doing with Android and hoping Schmidt might slip up, or they just shouldn't have brought an advisor on who was the CEO of a potentially major competitor. I was always amazed that that happened. Google Buys Android - 2005 http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2005-08-16/google-buys-a.. http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2005-08-16/google-buys-a.... Schmidt Joins Board - 2006 http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/08/29Google-CEO-Dr-Eric.. http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/08/29Google-CEO-Dr-Eric....
- sethbannon 13y agoDespicable. At least this is good news for patent reform.
- jrockway 13y agoAt least the US and USSR realized what Mutually Assured Destruction actually meant. It seems these big companies don't quite understand, and it's going to be pretty sad when they find out.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoThere is no mutually assured destruction here. Google is helpless.
- adventured 13y ago$56 billion in cash. They're anything but helpless. A $6 billion bid for RIM would solve the problem. They also have Motorola's massive patent hoard, with thousands of patents available to assault both Microsoft and Apple. So far Google has mostly played nice on patents.
- alexeisadeski3 13y ago$145B for Apple $50B for MS Google's outgunned - but you're right, not helpless.
- jemeshsu 13y agoEasy people, don't waste your emotional energy. Microsoft has been collecting Android licensing fee for years now. Apple has the objective to kill Androids. And you think Google don't use patent to sue? These companies are all evils.
- vincie 13y agoNon-Americans watching this - make sure you organize however you can to stop the American disease spreading to your country. Watch your politicians carefully for any sign that they might want to implement their patent systems in your country. Good luck.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoDisgusting.
- nu2ycombinator 13y agoIt is simple Microsoft and Apple are trying to get their paid 4.5Billion dollars from Google. It is a strategic mistake from Google side deciding not to be part of that team to buy the patents from Nortel.
- Ygg2 13y agoRight. Right. Because Google suing their OEMs as part of "Rockstar" group is sooo much better. Really helps building the trust of Android. MSFT/AAPL and the rest made a strategic decision to win those patents and destroy Android. They gave Google a choice: A) Don't take patent - get opened for lawsuits B) Take patent - lose trust because we are going to sue the shit out of Android OEMs C) Buy all patent for an overinflated price I just hope Google gets a team and invalidates all those patents, but I fear large patent price tag came for a reason.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- m0nastic 13y agoAre technology companies eventually going to become like cell phone companies (or oil companies) where everyone sort of agrees that they all suck, but "oh well, what are you going to do", or will some company become the de-facto "conscientious choice"? I feel like there's at least a bunch of "companies" on the software side of the equation who I don't feel shitty about supporting, but I think the problem will be with hardware.
- nutanc 13y ago#IgnoreLaughFightWin, we are now at the fight stage for Android and you know what comes next
- interpol_p 13y agoThis article is very emotionally loaded. Containing a lot of phrases designed to evoke an emotional response: 'Nuclear', 'DEFCON 1', 'Attack', 'Shocking'. It actually doesn't mention what Rockstar is suing Google for (i.e., whether it's monetary compensation, banning the sale of products, etc.) The article seems designed to get fans of these companies to react. I think this will play out as a much more boring, lengthy, and anti-climactic fashion than this article implies.
- axman6 13y agoBut OH MY GOD it's APPLE and MICROSOFT, didn't you see that? It's literally the devil incorporate trying to DESTROY GOOGLE who have NEVER done anything wrong ever!!! How dare they use the law to their own advantage! and besides, APPLE have never invented anything at all and stole it all from Google even before Google released it!
- Ygg2 13y agoYou are making guilt relative. Stop that. It's like saying. Person A murdered person B, but person B did something shady in the past (maybe murder, maybe he stole a dishwasher or maybe he was jaywalking), so it's all Ok for B to get murdered. He had it coming. Patent racketing is always bad. I don't care who gets fucked over by patent racket, even if it was the Devil himself, the snake from Eden, he still needs a fair trial.
- linuxhansl 13y agoSomebody please show me a single patent on software or a so called business-process that is worth anything (i.e. not obvious to somebody skilled in the art). Just one... I'll shut up then. Patents were supposed to encourage innovation, now they are doing the opposite (at least for software and business processes) and causing billions of wasted dollars and fat bonuses for patent lawyers. This move seems a bit desperate to me. To avoid fair competition on products, MSFT and Apple are using patents that they did not even invent. Pathetic and despicable.
- WildUtah 13y agoJust one good non-obvious software patent? US Pat #4,200,770 Diffie Hellman public key exchange There are literally dozens, maybe hundreds of good software patents out of the 500,000 or so that have been issued. We'd all be much better off without any software patents at all but it's not true that they are all fraudulent and abusive like the ones in these lawsuits. A small fraction are decent. Of course the innovations involved in those few patents would all have been discovered and published without patents as an incentive, because that's how software works.
- rst 13y agoAlso, in the same sphere, RSA. But the rationale for the patent system is to encourage innovation that wouldn't have happened without it, and it isn't clear that either of the public-key crypto patents qualifies. In each case, the inventors included academics (Hellman was on Stanford's faculty) whose job is to innovate and disclose their own innovations. (And while it's common these days for academics to patent and try to monetize at the same time, that wasn't always so. It was rarer, and sometimes controversial, in the 1970s.) The RSA patent made R, S, and A very rich --- but it isn't clear what it did for the rest of us.
- cheald 13y agoI'd like to second and amplify this comment. I've been searching for a single example of a software patent having ever been used to protect and promote innovation, rather than to just stifle competition or extort money from people who happen to build a successful business. If someone can provide a single instance of a software patent being used as a vehicle for promoting the arts and sciences, advancing the state of technology, or providing a means for a small inventor to bring a product to market that otherwise would not have been viable without the patent, I would be enormously grateful.
- smegel 13y ago> a "navigation tool for graphical user interface," describes a way of navigating through electronic documents. Another describes an "Internet protocol filter," and a third patent describes an "integrated message center." Sigh. Where are my anti-depressants.
- caf 13y ago"Pretty much anyone out there is infringing," said Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi. Well, that's pretty damning. If it's true, then it indicates that the patents never should have issued in the first place. If the overwhelming majority of "Anyone out there" managed to independently re-invent these alleged "inventions" without reference to the patent, then that seems to point out that whatever inventive step may have been involved was obvious.
- yajoe 13y agoLooks like Rockstar will be this generation's SCO. It's almost exactly the same tactic as last time, except now Microsoft isn't even bothering to hide its role. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversies
- zmmmmm 13y agoIt will be interesting to see how this goes now that it is (essentially) an all-American battle. The Samsung / Apple suit was always complicated by suspicions about the jury, partly (but not only) because it seemed impossible for a US jury to take an unbiased view of a trial between such an emblematic American company and a foreign corporation. This one will be a much different contest and perhaps we have a better chance of seeing a real examination of the underlying patent issues occur.
- tariqr 13y agoSony, Microsoft, Ericsson, Apple and RIM. So basically, SMEAR.
- firstOrder 13y agoAs someone wrote a century ago - "Monopoly, it inevitably engenders a tendency of stagnation and decay...the motive cause of technical and, consequently, of all other progress disappears to a certain extent and, further, the economic possibility arises of deliberately retarding technical progress. For instance, in America, a certain Owens invented a machine which revolutionised the manufacture of bottles. The German bottle-manufacturing cartel purchased Owens's patent, but pigeon-holed it, refrained from utilising it."
- confluence 13y agoHaha, when you have to sue your competitors to stop them from totally crushing you in business, it's game over, you have already lost. To be honest patents don't protect shit and their only value is in protecting oneself from pointless litigation by losers. The only way to protect your margins from attack by the competition is to have a naturally defensible product that derives it's value from the very nature of its use. Google search is naturally defensible. No one has their code (NDAs FTW!), and no one has the cash or the competence to build the computing infrastructure to serve that code. Microsoft Office/Windows was naturally defensible thanks to the network effects generated by third party applications on the platform, until the Internet/Linux destroyed that by being cheaper and faster. The iLine of products from Apple was naturally defensible for the same reasons as Windows, until Android ate their lunch, just like Windows ate Apple's lunch back in the 1980s. Apple also cried like a bunch of babies way back then and sued Microsoft for eating their lunch using GUI patents. > History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme. -- Mark Twain If you're in the tech world you’re mantra should be: innovate don't litigate. Apple and Microsoft, you have just shown that you'd rather litigate than innovate. Whenever that happens in the tech world that means that you are done.
- timedoctor 13y agoI think the ultimate outcome of this type of patent war is either: a) Re-examining the whole patent system to prevent this sort of attack b) Companies will have to re-locate to China or another country where US patents do not apply It's totally ridiculous to be sued for offering free software.
- r0h1n 13y agoAt the risk of downvotes & personal dissonance (I love Android and Google search), I'd like to posit an alternate filter to apply to this news. Given (a) Google's inexorable rise and domination of more and more parts of the Internet & mobile [0], and (b) the unwillingness or inability of regulators around the world to apply any kind of checks to its scary clout, could this - Rockstar - be a kind of defensive mechanism from the industry itself? I'm not saying that Apple, Microsoft, RIM etc. are suing Google out of a greater sense of responsibility towards consumer choice, but can we not - as external observers - view their action as a countermeasure to one competitor's overwhelming clout? [0] http://blog.launch.co/blog/googlewinseverything-part-1.html http://blog.launch.co/blog/googlewinseverything-part-1.html
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- WaterSponge 13y agoWe are all building software on the shoulders of giants but like to claim major pieces of glory once we grow into corporations. Remove a certain piece and like jenga it all falls down. Some pieces protected by patents. Others patentable but never claimed.
- tracker1 13y agoI would think that 4.4 billion could effectively fund congressional campaigns in a number of key districts.. which may be more effective use of said funds for Google at this point. If I were Google, I'd be funding an all out war on technology patents.
- OoTheNigerian 13y agoAnytime I see the latest "outrage" on HN, I laugh and remember us, citizens of my country that want to protest as long as they are not required to personally sacrifice too much. Most of these companies depend on you hackers (I do not write code) to be successful. If you decide to pull your apps from the app store, stop buying their products and write a post telling everyone why you made the move, they will be hurt. Even if the embargo is for one year only! But of course that will not happen. No one likes to be inconvenienced personally. It will mean loosing revenue. Other people (the EFF)should fight the battle. You donate your $10 to EFF and believe you have fought the good fight. Nothing will come out of this. Google will band with a few chaps on the other side (Facebook Twitter etc), a few hundreds of millions will be spent on lawyers and they will settle in one way or the other. After all, they are working together on other schemes (just like the politicians). Of course, Facebook will one day eliminate all privacy settings, or Google will put ads in our inbox and there will be outrage again. Of course nothing will come out of it. I try to limit my outrage these days. I suggest you should too.
- antocv 13y agoi agree and sympathise with your comment. however it is enough if a small minority takes action and great things can happen even then. for example gnu and linux. ive not seen many people who can be inconvienienced and use linux freedom software all the time. but ive seen some. they have made a change, not yet visible for the masses but its there. its those few who take the first steps. i think you should too. do it. even if its only you. i did that many years ago and couldnt be happier now.
- fauigerzigerk 13y agoI disagree completely. Protesting against these things (i.e participating in the latest outrage on HN and elsewhere) without sacrificing your entire livelihood is exactly the right thing to do. Being cynical about these things is what changes nothing, or rather it changes things for the worse. In countries where everyone is resigned into the idea that every government official is always going to be corrupt and every company will always be criminal are usually very poor. This isn't a war that is won or lost in the short term. We're all in this for long haul, we have to live with it and still try to move the balance in the right direction.
- dzink 13y agoThis is a survival tactic for the consortium. If you look at the bunch - all of them have hardware businesses with margins that are getting continuously eroded by Google's "free by ads and cheap manufacturing" model. If they don't make it expensive for Google to erode mobile margins, they won't last long in that market. The 0.01 Billion in bidding difference they got the patents with is quite suspicious too. The real pickle stems from all of the money feeding the patent trolling business. That industry needs to die a quick death, and instead it is getting fed by the buckets. Who knows where it will spill to next (killing fledgeling hardware/internet of things firms?).
- christopherryan 13y agoGOSPEL ARTIST POSES NUDE! Evon Latrail is the author of a children's book "When Mommy Went to Heaven". She wrote/recorded a few songs; "Lord Bless My Enemies" and "It Is Time" happens to be two of the titles. She even has a song entitled, "Can't You See (Abortion Is Murder). She went Pro-life after having a abortion! Really???? Now here is a photo of her posing in chocolate as a "Swamp Girl". The word Hypocrite is floating around somewhere. This story has made front page news in the local paper. How can this so called "Gospel Artist" be a role model is she's posing news? For more on this story.....Go to Google or YouTube and search, Evon Latrail.
- jmpeax 13y agoThe real villains aren't the companies involved in battles of fisticuffs, they are the corrupt or incompetent politicians who fail to abolish software patents.
- tehabe 13y agoThe problem is not if Google or Apple, Microsoft & Co. are good or evil. This patent war is evil, very evil. Because it could prevent companies like Jolla, Canonical or Mozilla to release their smart phone OS world wide. Especially small companies won't have a chance in a patent battle against a Apple, Microsoft or Google proxy. That is the biggest problem, and the solution has to be political, it won't be reached in the courts or on the market but in parliament.
- bad_user 13y agoWhat I don't understand is why in the world are companies allowed to buy patents in the first place? At the very least, patents should NOT be transferable. How is it acceptable for companies with big pockets to simply buy 6,000 patents and then sue the shit out of whomever they don't like? I mean, to some degree, I accept that patents in the health-care industry are helping, because research labs spend years and enormous amount of money on research, with results that can be easily copied. And so they need the first mover advantage in bringing the product they researched on the market. It's not perfect, but at least it has some economical and moral ground. But how in the world is it acceptable for patents to be transferred, like they are assets? If you weren't the one doing the research, then you shouldn't be the one that benefits from a government-granted monopoly, no matter how much money you have.
- Myrmornis 13y agoKnow nothing about this. But say they couldn't be transferred. Then you could have moribund companies holding a patent and doing nothing with it thus stopping other people from doing something that would benefit the world. But given that they can be transferred, there is a market, so a moribund company has an incentive to pass the patent on, and the patented thing gets realized, by someone.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- bad_user 13y agoThe fix is easy - if you can't bring it to market, then you lose it. Or lets just ban patents altogether. No matter the negative effects, it would be saner than what we currently have.
- adventured 13y agoIf the Obama DOJ has any guts, they'll break out the collusion section of anti-trust law and make some new anti-trust case law regarding multi-company patent offensives and the potential to cause harm to consumers.
- tluyben2 13y agoLike many have said already; how do you vote with a wallet when there is not so much choice. I need a new laptop; my macbook, after many (by apple and by myself) repairs, is falling apart. It's fast enough, but just broken. So I was going to get the 13 inch retina, but now I'm rethinking my position. But what is the alternative... I haven't seen much yet. I want long battery life, i7 4th gen, 13 inch and at least retina resolution. So Pixel, Ativ 9 pro, Yoga 2 pro, ... ? But I also don't want Windows; I don't want to pay for it. Problem... I know the thinkpad t440s has long battery life, i7 4th gen, linux can be installed(still pay for windows), but the resolution (& GPU) are simply too depressing. The tablet + phone. Firefox phone; I'll get one of those. Tablet? Are there any which you can buy now? I really would just like to see Ubuntu on everything; tablet, phone and laptop, but I guess that's not really an option. I say Ubuntu because it's the most obvious; when Ubuntu is on there I know I can replace it with another Linux and I can customize it at least. Like someone said; we cry here, but we all buy macbooks anyway. While a lot of us have the power to actually change things. If 100.000 people ask Lenovo for a Linux laptop, it'll probably come. Besides MS pressure (which is probably 100% of the reason) I wouldn't see why they wouldn't all offer the choice. It's just not popular enough; check any video on any startup site on HN: everyone has macbooks.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- hect0r 13y agoIt would be interesting to see what would happen if Microsoft/Apple moved beyond Google to target IBM.
- CmonDev 13y agoWell, it is lawful - just like Google's tax evasion.
- DanBC 13y agominor point: evasion is not legal, avoidance is legal. So, Google does tax avoidance, not tax evasion. And Google has lawyers and accountants telling them that what they're doing is legal, but if the UK tax authorities disagree it goes to a court. So it's possible that what Google is doing isn't legal, because it hasn't been tested in court.
- CmonDev 13y agoThank you for clarifying.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- josteink 13y agoGoogle's tax evation is a strictly "private" matter between Google and the (whatever, wherever) government. Full on patent-war in the entirety of mobile-space will hit a lot of collateral, and will affect what is available to customers and what price. I say people need to be more vocal about shunning patent-trolls like Apple and Microsoft. Without enough people complaining loudly about this, they'll just keep on at it until development can only be done with an army of lawyers at hand.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- CmonDev 13y agoWell, perhaps in the spirit of knowledge sharing and to set an example Google could share their full search algorithm?
- josteink 13y agoOK. So does this once and for all end the debate about Apple being a proper patent-troll, or do they need to buy a bridge first?
- Fuxy 13y agoAnybody else seeing Google suing Microsoft and Apple directly in the future or is it just me? This is battle stations and given Google doesn't use shell companies they either make one or declare all out war.
- hristiank 13y ago"The Rockstar consortium is an organization backed by Apple, Microsoft, BlackBerry, Ericsson and Sony." Out of all these companies RIM (BlackBerry) is the only one up for "sale". How long until Google tries to buy itself a backdoor into the alliance? I give them a couple of months.
- tehwalrus 13y agoThese patents are just "adverts, but on the internet" right? Exactly the sort of stuff that shouldn't have been granted a Patent in the first place. I hope google has the guts to use the "invalid patent" argument in court and rule this sort of nonsense invalid in future.
- RyanMcGreal 13y ago> "Pretty much anyone out there is infringing," said Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi. If "pretty much anyone out there" is breaking a law, that tells us there's something wrong with the law.
- michaelfeathers 13y agoMaybe the problem with patents is that they are transferrable property. What if patents were seen more as a license from the government to an inventor for a period of exclusivity? That would prevent the worst of this sort of stockpiling and weaponization.
- josteink 13y ago> "Pretty much anyone out there is infringing," said Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi. And that's the single best reason provided to end software patents once and for all. When everyone is "infringing" without even knowing it, without reading the patent or without trying to copy someone else's work, you should stop, take a step back, think about things, and realize the entire system is fundamentally broken. Or if you have no soul, file a lawsuit and hope to make lots of free monies.
- kriro 13y agoI wonder how hard Canonical will get hit eventually if Ubunut Phone ever comes close to being viable. But most importantly: lol software patents. The twisted part in me hopes every single startup will get sued for all the amazing one-click patents and whatnot that they infringe upon as soon as they secure their first round of financing at some point. Maybe then something will change but I doubt it.
- tits_for_tots 13y agoI don't know why Google doesn't just license these patents, it's pretty critical to their business. They obviously thought so when they were bidding billions of dollars for them.
- erikb 13y agoGreat article! Just as a side note: Because English is not my mother tongue I have problems to understand what the title actually wants to say, though. To me it sounds like Apple owns Microsoft, and Microsoft is Apple's "rockstar" because it sues Google. So I wonder if some mother tongue speakers could verify that the title is actually understandable to them and explain what the title wants to say. Thanks!
- ithinkso 13y agoOh you americans and your silly patents
- veganarchocap 13y agoIt seems to be these declining, nonreactive old-timers that seem to stay in authority by handing out court cases over arbitrary points. They're not protecting 'their material', they're stiffing innovation.
- ypcx 13y agoSo is it finally less expensive for Google to pay a lobbyist firm (hell, pay ALL the lobbyist firms) to significantly overhaul the patent law?
- fpp 13y agoThe key word in the title is nuclear - a war that no one can win
- emhart 13y agoThere is something mildly sickening and darkly amusing that Microsoft and Apple apparently learned enough losing over half a billion dollars in patent lawsuits filed by McKool Smith, to then hire them when they were ready to go after their competitors with patent suits.
- BenoitEssiambre 13y agoThis is nothing less than an attack on technology, innovation and engineering. They could try to compete by building better products and matching the level of openness of their competitor but they'd rather keep their platform closed so they can gouge their customers and use lawyers against anybody that doesn't. We live in a world where inventors can't build anything that get's them noticed by large established competitors without risking frivolous patent lawsuits on obvious concepts.
- existencebox 13y agoAs an engineer, I'm repulsed by the whole deal, to the point of feeling sick about it. I'm going to get a lot of negative posts about hyperbole, but no, I legitimately get red in the face and get a headache whenever I think too hard about the patent wars. It is our fucking JOB to build things, to move technology forward, that is at least, my entire reason for being what I am. so in my eyes at least; fuck the patent system; fuck the american built system for repressing innovation for "corporate protections." We all argue about whether it's a "better or worse" solution but at this point, when I spend 99% of my time hearing about the billions spent on suppressing innovation rather than supporting it, it makes me realize I want little to no part in the system that motivates this. I will have no part of it. My code will be open. I will build things that I care about, and give them to the world, and hopefully work at a place that repays me for that (as I have found now.) Consider this my very ill-placed manifesto to in my own endeavors, support innovation, not the ill-gotten-gains of the future holder of my patents. (I'm not sure if I put this here to get it out there; or for comments; or for thoughts; I think mostly I just feel that it needs to be said, although perhaps unnecessarily alongside an ocean of similar replies :P)
- padrikas 13y agoIt looks to me that it is really a wrong system when you can buy patents only to sue someone in the future. And it rarely benefits people who create stuff If you could buy patents only to use them (but the ownership of a patent would not be transferable) there would be no patent trolls
- transfire 13y agoI am surprise. There seems to be a lot of Google haters here. Tell me, would you be happier in a world without Google and Android?
- EGreg 13y agoI am shocked that Google's "ads in search" business was patented before Google was founded, and no one ever asserted this patent. Bill Gross' overture said they never patented it. Imagine for a second that Google will have to turn over a portion of the ads revenue from the past 10 years? It makes up 97% of their revenue...
- wmeredith 13y ago"Pretty much anyone out there is infringing," said Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi. Isn't that the definition of a broken system of selection?
- swat535 13y agoIt would be naïve to think they wouldn't do this. Google would do it if they were in the same position. This is mostly a problem with the law, the fact that such a thing is possible is a problem. Also, pretty much all these companies were invited to join Rockstar to buy the patents, including Google: http://www.techradar.com/.. http://www.techradar.com/... . Except Google decided that they wanted it all for themselves and went against the group, in the end they lost. The only reason to hold these patents are to basically sue other companies, the fact that Google bid against the group over and over again implies that if Google had gotten these patents they would have done exactly the same. So lets not pretend Google is a victim.
- bramswenson 13y agoJust keep overpaying for "pretty" hardware and a mediocre development environment and see where it gets us folks. Apple is just as bad as M$ ever was, they just have more style.
- clavalle 13y agoIf your patents are obvious enough that 'everybody is infringing', your patent should not have been issued.
- PeterisP 13y agoI'm happy for patent war to go nuclear. It desperately needs reform and neutering; and if lawsuits like these can motivate some big-tech companies like, say, Google to start lobbying seriously for patent reform then this exactly what the world needs. And by lobbying seriously I don't mean a couple of million that were spent on some other activities - if such companies are eager to spend amount such as 4 billion or 12 billion on purchases that include zero benefit to their products&customers, but simply as patent war ammunition&defense; then I'd expect that they can easily spend hundreds of millions in campaign contributions to extuinguish the patent war as such. We don't need bigcorps accumulating frivolous patents to ensure mutually assured destruction - it doesn't work that well as a deterrant, and it is used against smaller corporations. We need disarmament.
- emehrkay 13y agoIt this not business as usual? Not saying it is "right," but not saying that it is out of the norm. It seems to be an issue now that people(consumers, nerds, etc.) have emotional connections to these companies
- gesman 13y agoThis is a chance for Obama to do the right thing to boost innovation and economy.
- Pxtl 13y agoMy Apple fanboy friends always try to argue how Apple's hardware and software are superior, as if that'll convince me that I should buy Apple gear. I keep explaining the same thing: I know Apple makes the best stuff. I don't avoid Apple because of quality considerations. I avoid Apple because they're screwing up the industry, an industry I use for both my career and my hobbies.
- throwawaykf 13y agoAllow me to inject some perspective. 1) For all the talk of Microsoft and Apple "abusing patents", it was actually Google that had to pay 14 million in damages for actually doing just that. Let's just not forget that before deciding who should be "alienating the tech community". However, Google's PR really is very good, and unfortunately, most people here accept it without critical thought because it confirms their biases. 2) This is business, and business is war. Giving away Android for free was a direct attack on Microsoft's and Apple's business model. They are simply responding in kind. Most people here root for Google simply because they give away tons of really cool stuff for free, and/or because they seem to be "more aligned" with free/open source, which appears to be the dominant religion 'round these parts. However, people elsewhere would see this as perfectly natural. 3) Google is very weak on the patent front, and they know it. So while they hustle to buy up patents from all sorts of sources, they simultaneously try to spin the patent system as "broken" and their own moves as "defensive" in an attempt to reduce their disadvantage in the long term. It may seem counter-intuitive: why simultaneously buy patents and work to weaken their value? Because buying patents is just a short term defensive move. In the long term, Google would be perfectly happy to not have a patent system at all because all their competitive advantage is locked away in their data centers. This is a luxury Apple and Microsoft do not have. They put out products that anyone anywhere can copy, so they would prefer having a patent system. 4) As mentioned below, Google had an option of joining the consortium, but decided to go it alone. Drummond's blog post says it would not have helped Android, but that is very shallow reasoning. They could have always joined in and negotiated the rights to indemnify Android vendors in exchange for contributing a lot more towards the winning bid. Maybe the consortium would not have agreed to it -- we'll never know, because Google peremptorily declined to join in. But I have no idea why they though they could outbid a consortium of multiple giants in the space. 5) As mentioned in TFA, there is some truth to the argument that Rockstar is actually independent of Microsoft and Apple. I know of patent trolls that have funding from e.g. hedge funds, but operate entirely independently. Heck, IV is a perfectly good example. They have funding from Google themselves, and yet they turned around and sued Motorola! Now, allow me to address your theory: You posit that this may invoke the ire of the "tech community" and this would be a disadvantage to Apple and Microsoft. Some questionable assumptions: 1) The tech community in general has a similar world view as the HN (or is it SV?) bubble. Trust me on this, HN is an enormous echo chamber. If you ask software engineers outside this bubble -- which is, you know, most of the world -- about patents, you'll get three responses: a) "What's a patent?" (No, really.) b) "I don't mind patents." c) "Having a patent as an achievement!" 2) The tech community, even if it does by some remote chance share your world view, won't care. This is business as usual, and has historically always been so. Now you may move the goal posts and say that by "tech community" you mean "the good ones", the "hackers". Again, I'm not so sure. Consider the NSA revelations: All the comments on HN are rife with outrage. Yet would you believe, even for a minute, that the NSA does not have the best of the best? Edit: I really do not wish to come across as supporting one company over another, and hope to maintain a neutral tone. I think all the companies involved are perfectly good companies to work for, and perfectly justified in what they're doing. I'm just trying to present a perspective that is somewhat lacking in most comments so far.
- wfunction 13y agoI'm extremely surprised no one's mentioned the timing of the whole thing -- right before the Innovation Act.
- mcherm 13y agoI hope that they manage to ban the import and sale of ALL Android phones, iPhones, and Windows phones simultaneously. I'm not sure what else might actually motivate Congress to change the law.
- neovive 13y agoAndroid has really been a source of innovation over the past few years. I would hate to see things take a step back. I recall a couple years ago, when Google had to remove the integrated search feature from Android -- that searched both local and online -- due to some IP infringement.
- Fundlab 13y agoIf patents are granted to drive innovation, how is Rockstar encouraging that in this case?
- usefulcat 13y agoThe patent system probably added more value 200 years ago when the dissemination of knowledge was not nearly as easy or cheap as it is today. The reason for this, of course, is technology. Looking at this situation from a very meta- perspective, I find it fascinating that what's effectively happening is that the patent system is seeking to undermine the very technological forces that have made it less relevant. Almost like watching two different species compete against each other in nature.
- ChikkaChiChi 13y agoThis should make HP's WebOS patent sale more competitive.
- josephlord 13y agoI'm going to hold judgement until I understand the size of licensing fees being requested (and if there is a separate FRAND rate for any Standards Essential Patents). Google bid $4.4Bn for this portfolio so they must have see value and/or danger in these patents. I disagree with the article's statement that "Google has plenty of patents" as this doesn't seem to the case in the current battles with Apple and Microsoft. The Motorola purchase doesn't seem to have helped much in this area either.
- ChrisNorstrom 13y ago??? They spent 4.5 billion on patents rather than invest in their own products. For all they know the patent system can completely change in the next 5 years, outlawing the kind of crap they're pulling right now.
- mydpy 13y agoWe need to treat the cause and not the symptom. Because really, if Google won this suit, they would most likely be trying the same tactics.
- LVB 13y agoAt my last job, 15 years ago, I was granted four patents. I also got a fancy engraved plaque for each one. I've since moved, and those plaques sit in unpacked boxes. My wife has occasionally pressed me to hang then up like I used to, when we both saw them as a point of pride. I have trouble explaining to her why they're an embarrassment to me now, and that I'm not showing them off. I'll be happy when I see they've expired.
- nullc 13y agoIf you're aware of anyone being strong-armed with your patents you could make amends with your conscience by offering to consult with them to help them workaround or invalidate them.
- locusm 13y agoHow does one keep up with new comments in a thread like this, wheres the sort by date?
- acd 13y agoI think software patents sucks! Software patents is a way for big corporations to keep smaller agile competitors off their turf creating monopolies & oligopolies.
- 1010011010 13y agoMicrosoft and Apple are assholes.
- NicoJuicy 13y agoIt's quite easy, in the days, it was Apple vs the rest, and Apple got popular (Mac vs PC, ...) Now, its Google versus the rest, we'll see how this goes :)
- Fizzadar 13y agoIt's such a sad sight to see companies pour billions into damaging each other (and themselves) rather than innovating and creating new things.
- belgianguy 13y agoFor me this feels like it's the famed "Thermonuclear option" Steve Jobs alluded to: two of the biggest tech giants and their ilk conspiring to KO a competitor in one of the most cowardly ways possible. As one shouldn't make the assumption that Rockstar is looking to compete, Rockstar is looking to defeat. This all feels like instead of studying harder you pay off the schoolyard bully to go beat up that kid you don't like because he gets better grades than you do. Rockstar is not just a patent troll, it's the Patent Troll King. It's much larger, and has vastly more financial backing, most notably from Apple and Microsoft. It's nearly invincible (as it can't be counter-sued). Plus the case is filed in Eastern Texas, known to side with patent holders. Both companies have much cash in their coffers, and both are feeling the heat from Android. For Apple, the high-end Android devices eat into their margins. While Apple still is very profitable, Android's break-neck pace forces them to come up with their own new features or risk looking dated, coupled with Android's often better-specced phones that are cheaper than the iPhone. Although brand loyalty is shielding Apple from large shifts, it can't afford to sit still. Microsoft on the other hand, is playing catch-up in Mobile after missing the boat miserably, and while the focus should be on making their own products better, they largely seem to have been industrious in harassing Android hardware manufacturers, plus employing some questionable PR-tactics to smear its competition. They'd both be relieved to see Android wither and die. The tactic at the heart of the battle against Android seems to be the following: increasing Android Total Cost of Ownership by drowning it in patent licenses. This in an attempt to make it toxic to any OEM or potential Android partner (as they have to pay license fees, or could be sued to oblivion if they refuse), all in a bid to make Android less attractive (vis-a-vis e.g. Windows). I don't know the might of Android/Google, nor how much strength it'll need to face off against the now teamed arsenals of both Apple and Microsoft. If Rockstar can string Android up with enough patent licenses, OEMs will bail, developers will leave and Android revenues will dry up. It'll make a Windows license look cheap and safe in comparision. Then Microsoft can return to pointing and laughing at the open-source community, sit back and let their software rot once more as they just eliminated their direct competition. They'll have some air fist-fights with Apple to seemingly 'compete'. What more is Rockstar than a hired gun they can sic on any software outfit that might prove competitive? What if Microsoft feels that Valve's SteamBox is getting a little too much traction for their comfort, why wouldn't they just send their bully after them? What if Ubuntu can cling on to some larger marketshare when it can smoothly switch between phone and desktop software? Why shouldn't Microsoft try and hobble innovative efforts by letting Rockstar make the developers' lives a living hell? It's more than sickening that some Microsoft/Apple fans are already reacting all indignant and holier-than-thou now that their patent lackey has a Nortel patent on search, as if Google stole web-search from them all along, and they only just noticed it. What can counter Rockstar? At what point is this hulking giant too big for the market it's trying to disrupt? What stops this beast from going after any open source project that proves slightly popular? How can a developer rest easy at night, knowing that any day a Rockstar lawyer might be knocking on his/her door, and that financial ruin lies ahead? Whether by lawyer fees after a Pyrrhic victory or after being shut down because he/she was found to infringe on something so very basic a child of five years old could have figured it out? John Vesci himself said that 'Pretty much anybody out there is infringing', meaning that any company name that gets in their sights, they can take apart. Is that furthering the sciences? Is that what passes for innovation nowadays? As a developer, this makes me sick to my stomach. But the system allows it, and there's been too much financial profitability to get this genie back in the bottle, so the odds of reform happening before this warhead hits are slim. Even if it were to happen, it'll be thoroughly undressed and defanged before being applied to any case worth its salt.
- kazagistar 13y ago> "Pretty much anyone out there is infringing," said Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi. In other words, the law is totally useless and needs to be modified if not totally revoked ASAP.
- pasbesoin 13y agoI have, perhaps, some degree of sympathy for compensating people whose significant work is subsequently, directly used. I'm about done with, "You can't do it because I did it first." The world wants to move forward. Your outsized self-interest, simply doesn't interest me.
- eonil 13y agoThis is the disaster started by Google themselves. Also a reward for betraying friendly partner - especially who is not likely can take Google's business, and even attacking them using new partner. Now Google's mates are only Samsung and telecoms which seems really not helpful on these kind of lawsuit or Google's image. See now what's happening. Apple-Microsoft alliance against Google, Samsung and telecoms…? Am I alone feeling former team looks nicer?