8 ms·

This may be true, but let's not get fooled into thinking that because "they" are the enemy, Google must be our friend. Google is playing a very dubious game he

This may be true, but let's not get fooled into thinking that because "they" are the enemy, Google must be our friend. Google is playing a very dubious game here, and it has nothing to do with being on "our" side of the patent issue. They've tried to buy the same patents, refused to participate in a joint effort to safeguard those patents for all, and then knowingly violated those patents. All through this, they've been silent about their motives, and have even tried to mislead the public by claiming they were never invited to join. There are no "good guys" in this conflict, no sides any of us should be on.

mtgx 13y ago
> refused to participate in a joint effort to safeguard those patents for all Source? you're not confusing these with the Novell patents, are you? Either way, this is the worst case of patent trolling, and may even raise anti-trust issues. Speaking of which, weren't they specifically told not to sue and gang up on other companies when they bought these?
midko 13y ago
> "very dubious game" Quite a statement especially on the background of the other companies involved. Any substantial arguments for that? Until recently, Google had not filed even a single patent lawsuit [1] and so far still has not done so against Apple, MS, and the like, afaik. Meanwhile, the 'rockstars' have been going rampant [2]. [1] http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/02/google-files-first-patent-infringement.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/02/google-files-first-patent... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars
- reticulated 13y ago
  Just because it's not in Google's name: http://www.fosspatents.com/search/label/Motorola http://www.fosspatents.com/search/label/Motorola Edit: Ah, I see you edited when you spotted Google had in fact filed suit.
  - midko 13y ago
    Not sure what edit you are referring to, my original post already stated that until recently they haven't filed a lawsuit.
air 13y ago
I think separating good guys and bad guys is pretty simple, if one is against (at least software) patents: Using patents aggressively makes you a bad guy. Google has not done this, Microsoft and Apple have.
- IBM 13y ago
  They haven't done it because they don't have many patents. It's easy to act noble about how you'll use your patents when you don't have any. Other commenters have noted that Google is currently suing Apple and others over standards essential patents (no just because the lawsuit started before their acquisition closed doesn't mean anything, they could settle or withdraw their case). Google had the opportunity to join a consortium with Microsoft to bid on the Novell patents, they declined. They could have joined this consortium as well but they decided to bid for it alone. Not only would it have shared the costs among the group, but it would have also prevented each other from suing over them. Google clearly wanted to control these patents themselves so that they could extract licensing deals from others, something that isn't so easy to do when you just have a license for a patent.
  - Thirsty 13y ago
    >"Google clearly wanted to control these patents themselves so that they could extract licensing deals from others..." Has Google ever extracted licensing deals from others?
    - IBM 13y ago
      They've certainly tried to against Microsoft but they failed. Microsoft and Apple were required by the government to license their standards related patents under reasonable terms to anyone before this Nortel patent portfolio buy was cleared. As far as I know none of them are trying to sue over SEPs. I don't even think this lawsuit contains patents related to standards, but it's kind of a moot point because no company actually has a controlling interest in Rockstar. It's all John Veschi and other former Nortel employees who run their company. http://allthingsd.com/20130905/microsoft-trounces-google-in-battle-over-standard-essential-patents/ http://allthingsd.com/20130905/microsoft-trounces-google-in-...
abrahamsen 13y ago
That is a blatant lie. The Google blog post from the time is available here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/when-patents-attack-android.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/when-patents-attack-a... Google is explicit about why they wanted the patents, and why joining the consortium would not further that goal.
zimbatm 13y ago
> They've tried to buy the same patents, refused to participate in a joint effort to safeguard those patents for all, and then knowingly violated those patents. That's a very misleading claim. It's not because they decided to buy a big pool of patents that they necessarily knew that 7 of them would apply to their tech. Moreover it's not clear either that they implemented anything after the fact. Those patents seem to be touching fundamental things like advertisement and search.
keypusher 13y ago
Google wanted these patents so that they would not be used aggressively against them. Google has no history of using patents against other companies aggressively. I'm on the side of the company that isn't using software patents to sue other companies, which in this case is Google. This isn't nearly as complicated as you are making it out to be.
- gibwell 13y ago
  False. Google uses parents aggressively through its wholly owned subsidiary, Motorola.
  - TheMagicHorsey 13y ago
    Wrong on all accounts. They use patents defensively against those that are suing to shut down Android.
    - gibwell 13y ago
      By that definition, Apple uses patents defensively against those who are using to shut down iOS.
      - TheMagicHorsey 13y ago
        Wrong. Apple initiated patent lawsuits against Android. Android did not initiate the lawsuits. Do you follow this space? Look at the history of when the lawsuits are filed, and who filed them. There is no equivalence.
        gibwell 13y ago
        Google/Motorola initiated a patent suit against Apple's use of push email in Germany. What did that have to do with anything Apple was doing?
        13y ago
ZeroGravitas 13y ago
By "refused to participate in a joint effort to safeguard those patents for all", do you mean that Microsoft offered to buy these patents jointly with Google, in such a way that Microsoft would be able to use them to extort Android manufacturers and Google wouldn't be able to use the patents to help defend them? Because if so that's some pretty heavy spin you're putting on it. edit: excerpt from Google's official response, linked elsewhere in this thread (note it was in reference to a different bundle of patents). " If you think about it, it's obvious why we turned down Microsoft’s offer. Microsoft's objective has been to keep from Google and Android device-makers any patents that might be used to defend against their attacks. A joint acquisition of the Novell patents that gave all parties a license would have eliminated any protection these patents could offer to Android against attacks from Microsoft and its bidding partners. Making sure that we would be unable to assert these patents to defend Android — and having us pay for the privilege — must have seemed like an ingenious strategy to them. We didn't fall for it. Ultimately, the U.S. Department of Justice intervened, forcing Microsoft to sell the patents it bought and demanding that the winning group (Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, EMC) give a license to the open-source community, changes the DoJ said were “necessary to protect competition and innovation in the open source software community.” This only reaffirms our point: Our competitors are waging a patent war on Android and working together to keep us from getting patents that would help balance the scales."
- aroch 13y ago
  >note it was in reference to a different bundle of patents Then it is isn't relevant here. Also, the irony of using an involved party's statement when complaining about "spin" is palpable
abraxasz 13y ago
Completely agree with you, that's why I think this whole mess is wonderful news. I like the nuclear war analogy here, and I hope that both sides will hurt each other so bad in this little game that at the end they'll sit down somewhere and say: "never again". Then they'll start doing what all of us expect the Tech Giants to do: start pouring money on patent laws policies to put trolls out of business. It will have taken a lot of wasted money and harm to each of them to reach that point, but better late than never, eh.
zanny 13y ago
> then knowingly violated those patents I can't compile hello world in any language without violating dozens of patents.
- moocowduckquack 13y ago
  Which ones?
  - AnthonyMouse 13y ago
    That's a big part of the problem, actually. If it was clear which patents they were then they could be specifically avoided. The problem is that there are so many overly broad patents that you can't even know which ones you're infringing until the troll jumps out from under the bridge. But to answer the question in broad terms, the compiler you're using and the operating system you're running it on will probably infringe something or other in its rather comprehensive standard library or system call implementation, which you've incorporated when you type the equivalent of "#include <stdio.h>" in your Hello World program.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
pg 13y ago
I'm sure Google didn't try to buy the patents to do this with them.
- gibwell 13y ago
  Give that they are the ones with a search monopoly, that's clearly true, but it doesn't say anything about their ethics.
deathchill 13y ago
Google was invited to join in the group with Apple, Microsoft and the others? Any links or anything I could check out? I tried googling but there's too much about this particular case to find anything useful! I was under the impression that they were never offered to join in. Thanks!
chongli 13y ago
There are no "good guys" in this conflict, no sides any of us should be on. You're mistaken. It is we, the public, that are the good guys. Whatever Google's motives are does not matter. What matters is the outcome and how that impacts the public and the future of innovation. Right now, it is pretty clear to many observers that the system is broken and having a very negative impact on innovation, competition and the public. The legal and R&D costs associated with patents are inevitably passed on to the public.
kazagistar 13y ago
From the perspective of "trivial software patents are bullshit", violating software patents does not in any way make you a "bad guy". Furthermore, google is actively lobbying to weaken software patents. I would say, then, that in this case, they are certainly my ally, or at the very least, the enemy of my enemy.

mtgx 13y ago

> refused to participate in a joint effort to safeguard those patents for all Source? you're not confusing these with the Novell patents, are you? Either way, this is the worst case of patent trolling, and may even raise anti-trust issues. Speaking of which, weren't they specifically told not to sue and gang up on other companies when they bought these?

midko 13y ago

> "very dubious game" Quite a statement especially on the background of the other companies involved. Any substantial arguments for that? Until recently, Google had not filed even a single patent lawsuit [1] and so far still has not done so against Apple, MS, and the like, afaik. Meanwhile, the 'rockstars' have been going rampant [2]. [1] http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/02/google-files-first-patent-infringement.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/02/google-files-first-patent... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars

reticulated 13y ago
Just because it's not in Google's name: http://www.fosspatents.com/search/label/Motorola http://www.fosspatents.com/search/label/Motorola Edit: Ah, I see you edited when you spotted Google had in fact filed suit.
- midko 13y ago
  Not sure what edit you are referring to, my original post already stated that until recently they haven't filed a lawsuit.

air 13y ago

I think separating good guys and bad guys is pretty simple, if one is against (at least software) patents: Using patents aggressively makes you a bad guy. Google has not done this, Microsoft and Apple have.

IBM 13y ago
They haven't done it because they don't have many patents. It's easy to act noble about how you'll use your patents when you don't have any. Other commenters have noted that Google is currently suing Apple and others over standards essential patents (no just because the lawsuit started before their acquisition closed doesn't mean anything, they could settle or withdraw their case). Google had the opportunity to join a consortium with Microsoft to bid on the Novell patents, they declined. They could have joined this consortium as well but they decided to bid for it alone. Not only would it have shared the costs among the group, but it would have also prevented each other from suing over them. Google clearly wanted to control these patents themselves so that they could extract licensing deals from others, something that isn't so easy to do when you just have a license for a patent.
- Thirsty 13y ago
  >"Google clearly wanted to control these patents themselves so that they could extract licensing deals from others..." Has Google ever extracted licensing deals from others?
  - IBM 13y ago
    They've certainly tried to against Microsoft but they failed. Microsoft and Apple were required by the government to license their standards related patents under reasonable terms to anyone before this Nortel patent portfolio buy was cleared. As far as I know none of them are trying to sue over SEPs. I don't even think this lawsuit contains patents related to standards, but it's kind of a moot point because no company actually has a controlling interest in Rockstar. It's all John Veschi and other former Nortel employees who run their company. http://allthingsd.com/20130905/microsoft-trounces-google-in-battle-over-standard-essential-patents/ http://allthingsd.com/20130905/microsoft-trounces-google-in-...

abrahamsen 13y ago

That is a blatant lie. The Google blog post from the time is available here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/when-patents-attack-android.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/when-patents-attack-a... Google is explicit about why they wanted the patents, and why joining the consortium would not further that goal.

zimbatm 13y ago

> They've tried to buy the same patents, refused to participate in a joint effort to safeguard those patents for all, and then knowingly violated those patents. That's a very misleading claim. It's not because they decided to buy a big pool of patents that they necessarily knew that 7 of them would apply to their tech. Moreover it's not clear either that they implemented anything after the fact. Those patents seem to be touching fundamental things like advertisement and search.

keypusher 13y ago

Google wanted these patents so that they would not be used aggressively against them. Google has no history of using patents against other companies aggressively. I'm on the side of the company that isn't using software patents to sue other companies, which in this case is Google. This isn't nearly as complicated as you are making it out to be.

gibwell 13y ago
False. Google uses parents aggressively through its wholly owned subsidiary, Motorola.
- TheMagicHorsey 13y ago
  Wrong on all accounts. They use patents defensively against those that are suing to shut down Android.
  - gibwell 13y ago
    By that definition, Apple uses patents defensively against those who are using to shut down iOS.
    - TheMagicHorsey 13y ago
      Wrong. Apple initiated patent lawsuits against Android. Android did not initiate the lawsuits. Do you follow this space? Look at the history of when the lawsuits are filed, and who filed them. There is no equivalence.
      - gibwell 13y ago
        Google/Motorola initiated a patent suit against Apple's use of push email in Germany. What did that have to do with anything Apple was doing?
        13y ago

ZeroGravitas 13y ago

By "refused to participate in a joint effort to safeguard those patents for all", do you mean that Microsoft offered to buy these patents jointly with Google, in such a way that Microsoft would be able to use them to extort Android manufacturers and Google wouldn't be able to use the patents to help defend them? Because if so that's some pretty heavy spin you're putting on it. edit: excerpt from Google's official response, linked elsewhere in this thread (note it was in reference to a different bundle of patents). " If you think about it, it's obvious why we turned down Microsoft’s offer. Microsoft's objective has been to keep from Google and Android device-makers any patents that might be used to defend against their attacks. A joint acquisition of the Novell patents that gave all parties a license would have eliminated any protection these patents could offer to Android against attacks from Microsoft and its bidding partners. Making sure that we would be unable to assert these patents to defend Android — and having us pay for the privilege — must have seemed like an ingenious strategy to them. We didn't fall for it. Ultimately, the U.S. Department of Justice intervened, forcing Microsoft to sell the patents it bought and demanding that the winning group (Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, EMC) give a license to the open-source community, changes the DoJ said were “necessary to protect competition and innovation in the open source software community.” This only reaffirms our point: Our competitors are waging a patent war on Android and working together to keep us from getting patents that would help balance the scales."

aroch 13y ago
>note it was in reference to a different bundle of patents Then it is isn't relevant here. Also, the irony of using an involved party's statement when complaining about "spin" is palpable

abraxasz 13y ago

Completely agree with you, that's why I think this whole mess is wonderful news. I like the nuclear war analogy here, and I hope that both sides will hurt each other so bad in this little game that at the end they'll sit down somewhere and say: "never again". Then they'll start doing what all of us expect the Tech Giants to do: start pouring money on patent laws policies to put trolls out of business. It will have taken a lot of wasted money and harm to each of them to reach that point, but better late than never, eh.

zanny 13y ago

> then knowingly violated those patents I can't compile hello world in any language without violating dozens of patents.

moocowduckquack 13y ago
Which ones?
- AnthonyMouse 13y ago
  That's a big part of the problem, actually. If it was clear which patents they were then they could be specifically avoided. The problem is that there are so many overly broad patents that you can't even know which ones you're infringing until the troll jumps out from under the bridge. But to answer the question in broad terms, the compiler you're using and the operating system you're running it on will probably infringe something or other in its rather comprehensive standard library or system call implementation, which you've incorporated when you type the equivalent of "#include <stdio.h>" in your Hello World program.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

pg 13y ago

I'm sure Google didn't try to buy the patents to do this with them.

gibwell 13y ago
Give that they are the ones with a search monopoly, that's clearly true, but it doesn't say anything about their ethics.

deathchill 13y ago

Google was invited to join in the group with Apple, Microsoft and the others? Any links or anything I could check out? I tried googling but there's too much about this particular case to find anything useful! I was under the impression that they were never offered to join in. Thanks!

chongli 13y ago

There are no "good guys" in this conflict, no sides any of us should be on. You're mistaken. It is we, the public, that are the good guys. Whatever Google's motives are does not matter. What matters is the outcome and how that impacts the public and the future of innovation. Right now, it is pretty clear to many observers that the system is broken and having a very negative impact on innovation, competition and the public. The legal and R&D costs associated with patents are inevitably passed on to the public.

kazagistar 13y ago

From the perspective of "trivial software patents are bullshit", violating software patents does not in any way make you a "bad guy". Furthermore, google is actively lobbying to weaken software patents. I would say, then, that in this case, they are certainly my ally, or at the very least, the enemy of my enemy.