3 ms·

Hang on a sec, if the patents are found valid, and Google etc. are found infringing, then they have s/broken the law/failed make appropriate agreements so that

by axman6 13y ago

Hang on a sec, if the patents are found valid, and Google etc. are found infringing, then they have s/broken the law/failed make appropriate agreements so that they are then allowed by the owner of the monopoly defined by the claims to use the defined invention, and are now liable to a civil suite from the owner of said patents in order to exercise their exclusive right granted by the ownership of a letters patent/. s/Breaking the law/Using patented inventnions/ is OK when you're Google, but an abomination if Apple/MS do it I guess? Obviously Google knew the value of the patents, and clearly knew the contents, and if it's found they continued to infringe them, then they're getting what's coming to them. If it were small companies without the resources to discover the patents they might be infringing it'd be a different matter, but this is absolutely not the case here. Edit: law ain't broked, but Google et al potentially open to exclusion of the use of the inventions defined by the exclusive patent right.

6thSigma 13y ago
Google didn't bid on these patents because they were infringing - they bid on the patents so they wouldn't get patent trolled.
- axman6 13y ago
  ... if they're not infringing, then they have nothing to worry about. Are you kidding me?
  - 6thSigma 13y ago
    No I'm not kidding you - patent trolls sue looking for a settlement because fighting the suit usually costs much more than settling would.
  - smsm42 13y ago
    That reminds me "if you're a honest person, you need no privacy". It's not like there are tons of bullshit patents on everything on Earth from hyperlinks to rounded angles. Of course if you're a honest man you have never to fear from bullshit patents and the words "patent troll" mean just a character in Discworld novels who is a troll and makes living my analyzing patent applications.
  - Goronmon 13y ago
    ... if they're not infringing, then they have nothing to worry about. Are you kidding me? I'm sure their infringing. Hell, I'm sure I've probably written some software somewhere along the lines that infringes on some patent this company holds. Developing software with patents around is like pirating media. You just have to hope you don't give anyone a reason to come after you.
  - code_duck 13y ago
    You seriously are unaware of how the legal world around patents works, but come on here and decry how HN is supposedly so ignorant about patents?
glibgil 13y ago
Calm down. Google didn't break "the law". Intellectual property is covered by civil law. One party has to prove that a contract was broken, a patent misused or other IP misused. They also have to prove their damages. They do this in court and if they make their case then the other company has to pay for those damages. It is not a crime. It is not breaking a law. This is not a semantic issue either. It is a civil matter.
olefoo 13y ago
You don't understand how patents work. Patents allow you to prevent someone else from selling a product that is covered by your patent. But to do so; you have to get a court order and show that the product in question is covered by the patent in question. It's not a question of whether the defendant is doing something illegal; it's a question of whether the rights the plaintiff asserts are valid. Of course, once the plaintiff has won an order; defying it is ... ill-considered.
- axman6 13y ago
  Right you are, a small slip on my part. To clarify for anyone playing along, a granted patent doesn't make using the invention illegal, but it does mean the owner of the patent how the right to a)exclude you from using it if they so choose, and b) they may also seek reparations due to potentially lost income from someone making use of their invention. (as well as other stuff)

by axman6 13y ago

6thSigma 13y ago

Google didn't bid on these patents because they were infringing - they bid on the patents so they wouldn't get patent trolled.

axman6 13y ago
... if they're not infringing, then they have nothing to worry about. Are you kidding me?
- 6thSigma 13y ago
  No I'm not kidding you - patent trolls sue looking for a settlement because fighting the suit usually costs much more than settling would.
- smsm42 13y ago
  That reminds me "if you're a honest person, you need no privacy". It's not like there are tons of bullshit patents on everything on Earth from hyperlinks to rounded angles. Of course if you're a honest man you have never to fear from bullshit patents and the words "patent troll" mean just a character in Discworld novels who is a troll and makes living my analyzing patent applications.
- Goronmon 13y ago
  ... if they're not infringing, then they have nothing to worry about. Are you kidding me? I'm sure their infringing. Hell, I'm sure I've probably written some software somewhere along the lines that infringes on some patent this company holds. Developing software with patents around is like pirating media. You just have to hope you don't give anyone a reason to come after you.
- code_duck 13y ago
  You seriously are unaware of how the legal world around patents works, but come on here and decry how HN is supposedly so ignorant about patents?

glibgil 13y ago

Calm down. Google didn't break "the law". Intellectual property is covered by civil law. One party has to prove that a contract was broken, a patent misused or other IP misused. They also have to prove their damages. They do this in court and if they make their case then the other company has to pay for those damages. It is not a crime. It is not breaking a law. This is not a semantic issue either. It is a civil matter.

olefoo 13y ago

You don't understand how patents work. Patents allow you to prevent someone else from selling a product that is covered by your patent. But to do so; you have to get a court order and show that the product in question is covered by the patent in question. It's not a question of whether the defendant is doing something illegal; it's a question of whether the rights the plaintiff asserts are valid. Of course, once the plaintiff has won an order; defying it is ... ill-considered.

axman6 13y ago
Right you are, a small slip on my part. To clarify for anyone playing along, a granted patent doesn't make using the invention illegal, but it does mean the owner of the patent how the right to a)exclude you from using it if they so choose, and b) they may also seek reparations due to potentially lost income from someone making use of their invention. (as well as other stuff)