8 ms·

Rockstar, Patent-Holding Firm Partially Owned by Apple & Microsoft, Sues Google

40 points by amatheus 13y ago

Kylekramer 13y ago
I just don't buy that everyone is equally a bad actor here. Even if we take for granted that Google are two faced liars who secretly love patents, their public messaging is completely different. Google repeatedly has come out against them. The members of Rockstar brag about their patents, even flaunted them in the iPhone announcement. That difference is enough to make me draw a line in between the companies. Of course, as Gruber's mocking of Android's openness has shown, he believes attempting to live up to an ideal and failing somewhat is worse than not even trying. At least when it comes to Google.
- scott_karana 13y ago
  So both sides have different approaches, and are known malevolent actors, but one is better in your book because of their PR?... :(
  - Kylekramer 13y ago
    PR, despite the bad rap it gets as bullshit, is not worthless. Apple, Microsoft and their cohorts proudly try to create a public perception that software patents are essential and deserved. Google has done the opposite by trying to get the public to understand the damage software patents can create. Given that patents are government controlled system, public perception is important. I find that PR distinction enough to not tar everyone with the same brush. To clarify, I do believe Google is fundamentally doing their best to improve the current patent situation. Perhaps naïvely. I just wrote about the situation with the assumption that Google are evil liars to approach Gruber on his level.
  - kkowalczyk 13y ago
    Not both sides. Apple and Microsoft has been waging anti-android patent war for ages, suing HTC, Samsung, Barns&Noble and many other Android manufacturers. They are publicly pro-patents and when they are failing in the marketplace are suing anyone who poses a threat to their business. Google is publicly against patents, releases a lot of source code under Apache license that grants patent rights and, as far as I know, haven't launched an offensive patent suit (i.e. against someone who hasn't sued them first). The Motorola lawsuits that Gruber (and quite a few anti-Google people) is so keen to quote happened years before Google acquired Motorola. At this point I don't even understand why people expect Google to just take it and not launch offensive against Apple and Microsoft. You can be pro-peace but if someone points a gun at you and shoot, you shoot back and that's what Google should do: shoot back.
    - IBM 13y ago
      I'd like to know where Apple has been public about patents because I find that surprising. If anything, there seems to be hardly any corporate communication addressing these types of things letting the media speculate to their heart's content. Your premise about Motorola is incorrect. Google was required to approve the patent assertions against Apple. From FOSS Patents: >A few months after that Zeitgeist talk, in January 2012, Google authorized a Motorola Mobility lawsuit against Apple over six patents in the Southern District of Florida. The merger agreement was publicly available and absolutely unequivocal about the fact that Motorola needed Google's consent prior to bringing new IP assertions while the merger was under antitrust review. But even if that weren't the case, there would be nothing stopping them from settling or withdrawing the case.
- badman_ting 13y ago
  It's certainly your prerogative, but realize that you are effectively saying you prefer to be lied to, at least in this instance.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- yohui 13y ago
  A comparison could be made to the journalistic debate over "false equivalence" in political reporting. For reference, see: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/a-bountiful-harvest-of-false-equivalence-analyses/280452/ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/a-bounti... For entertainment value, I took a paragraph from Gruber's post and made a few substitutions: If you want to argue that the whole budget debate stinks, and that all of these politcal parties are abusing it, I agree. But if you want to argue that conservative Republicans and Tea Partiers are in the wrong, and poor Democrats and liberals are victims of one-sided abuse, I’m going to have to disagree. If there’s a difference between Republicans and Democrats in this war, it’s not over nobility, but rather over how well each side has played the game. It’s looking more and more like Democrats made a strategic blunder... Though you should not take this too seriously, the structural parallels are amusing, superficial or not.
  - rhizome 13y ago
    I'd call it, "contemporary boilerplate rhetoric."
cageface 13y ago
Life very rarely presents us with simple black & white choices, but that doesn't mean that it's not important to make distinctions among distinctly different shades of gray. Don't let party apparatchiks like Gruber fool you with their smoke & mirrors. This is nothing more than an attempt by Apple & Microsoft to accomplish in the courtroom what they have failed to achieve in the marketplace. We have it straight from the Cupertino horse's mouth that this is a "nuclear war" designed to destroy Android. If this succeeds it will set a very dangerous and chilling precedent for the development of any new technology going forward. Anyone that claims to value innovation and opportunity for new ideas should condemn it.
- pazimzadeh 13y ago
  The idea that Apple is using to go on the offensive because they are "failing in the marketplace" is ridiculous, since extensive patents were touted during the iPhone's 2007 introductory keynote. Also, what evidence is there that Google is still committed to making Android open source even since Andy Rubin left the project? Finally, I don't know enough about Andy Rubin's relationship with Apple, but can somebody who does comment on this? http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/09/apple-to-itc-andy-rubin-got-inspiration.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/09/apple-to-itc-andy-rubin-g...
  - icebraining 13y ago
    Also, what evidence is there that Google is still committed to making Android open source even since Andy Rubin left the project? https://android.googlesource.com/platform/art/+/kitkat-release https://android.googlesource.com/platform/art/+/kitkat-relea...
    - pazimzadeh 13y ago
      As I understand it, most of Android's new features are coming in the form of proprietary apps rather than AOSP. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6656764 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6656764
  - cageface 13y ago
pearjuice 13y ago
From what I've understood he is actually defending and white knighting Apple's patent trolling. For anyone still in doubt whether Gruber is actively paid by Apple (and possibly others) to deliver viral marketing - here you go.
cromwellian 13y ago
So in Gruber's mind, if someone drops a bomb on your country, and you launch a retaliatory strike, you're just as bad. The timeline here would be instructive. Microsoft and Apple sued and threatened Android OEMs first. Apple's CEO is on record as practicing 'thermonuclear war'. Steve Ballmer gleefully cheered about their patent licensing. Both companies love patents. Jobs "and booooooy have we patented it!" Weaksauce attempt by Gruber at drawing an equivalence.
- IBM 13y ago
  Gruber is pretty clear about what's in his mind, so there's no need for terrible analogies. >If you want to argue that the whole patent system stinks, and that all of these tech giants are abusing it, I agree. But if you want to argue that Apple and Microsoft are in the wrong, and poor Google and their Android partners are victims of one-sided abuse, I’m going to have to disagree. If there’s a difference between Apple/Microsoft and Google in this war, it’s not over nobility, but rather over how well each side has played the game. These companies pursue what's in their self-interest, and attempts to portray Google as being somehow above it are disingenuous, regardless of how high-minded the PR makes them seem.
  - cageface 13y ago
    It would be naive to think that Google doesn't put its own interests first. That's the nature of any public corporation. However, there's a world of difference between corporations competing in the marketplace and winning by providing superior value for the customer and using a patent system pretty much everybody acknowledges is broken to have a second turn at bat after their own product strategies have failed. Until recently there was a gentleman's agreement among the big tech companies that patents weren't to be used offensively. We all suffer when every trivial detail of any software product is open to expensive litigation.
  - nileshtrivedi 13y ago
    It's not just PR. You didn't address cromwellian's point at all. His central point is that Apple and Microsoft started the "game". Edit: "Playing the game" too is a terrible analogy for patents lawsuits.
naner 13y ago
The difference between Lodsys and Rockstar is that Lodsys is a bully, suing small (and in some cases, downright tiny) companies that lack the financial wherewithal to fight back. And in fact, when Lodsys’s targets do fight back, Lodsys runs away — settling for nothing in order to avoid a trial. Rockstar may be a patent troll, but they’re a patent troll that at least is picking on someone its own size. Lodsys is _almost_ the antihero here. They are just being exploitative which is dumb and obnoxious. If only they were explicitly attacking Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle's ecosystems. Dishing out the abuse towards their small innocent customers. Using the system these companies have expanded and propped up to really hurt them. And say, "Hey, this is what we are doing. Maybe you should fix this Congress."
suprgeek 13y ago
So Rockstar - an NPE patent Troll by definition - filing lawsuits against Google & Samsung is the same as Motorola filing lawsuits according to Gruber. Except Motorola has - you know - actual products that it sells. Additionally this company was created by the Apple + M.S Cartel explicitly to go after Google and Android - not to create any value, only to harass and stifle a competitor. Sometimes Gruber gets so wrapped up in his own B.S. that he starts defending the scummy actions of Apple - sad.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
weixiyen 13y ago
The patent system is to blame here. Android is shipping on more units than any other OS and Google is going to win if things continue this way based on current trends. They are probably not far away from getting Android to a similar level of polish as iOS within the next few years. There's only so much you can improve on in terms of the OS software before you hit the point of diminishing returns. At this point, the trends are clear, Google will win the mobile OS war. There is really no other likely outcome at this point unless Apple does something drastic. In business, it is pretty much expected that public companies will act in the best interest of its own stakeholders, so this lawsuit was just something that had to happen. You can't blame Apple or Microsoft for this. This is what you do as a business to protect your products and removing your barriers to entry, or you fall off the mobile rocket ship. Also, honest question, but why do people get so upset over this blog? I just looked up John Gruber on Wikipedia and his full time job is maintaining a blog to write about Apple products, with a history of being an "Apple Apologist". We're we expecting him to write something different?

40 points by amatheus 13y ago

I just don't buy that everyone is equally a bad actor here. Even if we take for granted that Google are two faced liars who secretly love patents, their public messaging is completely different. Google repeatedly has come out against them. The members of Rockstar brag about their patents, even flaunted them in the iPhone announcement. That difference is enough to make me draw a line in between the companies. Of course, as Gruber's mocking of Android's openness has shown, he believes attempting to live up to an ideal and failing somewhat is worse than not even trying. At least when it comes to Google.

scott_karana 13y ago
So both sides have different approaches, and are known malevolent actors, but one is better in your book because of their PR?... :(
- Kylekramer 13y ago
  PR, despite the bad rap it gets as bullshit, is not worthless. Apple, Microsoft and their cohorts proudly try to create a public perception that software patents are essential and deserved. Google has done the opposite by trying to get the public to understand the damage software patents can create. Given that patents are government controlled system, public perception is important. I find that PR distinction enough to not tar everyone with the same brush. To clarify, I do believe Google is fundamentally doing their best to improve the current patent situation. Perhaps naïvely. I just wrote about the situation with the assumption that Google are evil liars to approach Gruber on his level.
- kkowalczyk 13y ago
  Not both sides. Apple and Microsoft has been waging anti-android patent war for ages, suing HTC, Samsung, Barns&Noble and many other Android manufacturers. They are publicly pro-patents and when they are failing in the marketplace are suing anyone who poses a threat to their business. Google is publicly against patents, releases a lot of source code under Apache license that grants patent rights and, as far as I know, haven't launched an offensive patent suit (i.e. against someone who hasn't sued them first). The Motorola lawsuits that Gruber (and quite a few anti-Google people) is so keen to quote happened years before Google acquired Motorola. At this point I don't even understand why people expect Google to just take it and not launch offensive against Apple and Microsoft. You can be pro-peace but if someone points a gun at you and shoot, you shoot back and that's what Google should do: shoot back.
  - IBM 13y ago
    I'd like to know where Apple has been public about patents because I find that surprising. If anything, there seems to be hardly any corporate communication addressing these types of things letting the media speculate to their heart's content. Your premise about Motorola is incorrect. Google was required to approve the patent assertions against Apple. From FOSS Patents: >A few months after that Zeitgeist talk, in January 2012, Google authorized a Motorola Mobility lawsuit against Apple over six patents in the Southern District of Florida. The merger agreement was publicly available and absolutely unequivocal about the fact that Motorola needed Google's consent prior to bringing new IP assertions while the merger was under antitrust review. But even if that weren't the case, there would be nothing stopping them from settling or withdrawing the case.
badman_ting 13y ago
It's certainly your prerogative, but realize that you are effectively saying you prefer to be lied to, at least in this instance.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
yohui 13y ago
A comparison could be made to the journalistic debate over "false equivalence" in political reporting. For reference, see: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/a-bountiful-harvest-of-false-equivalence-analyses/280452/ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/a-bounti... For entertainment value, I took a paragraph from Gruber's post and made a few substitutions: If you want to argue that the whole budget debate stinks, and that all of these politcal parties are abusing it, I agree. But if you want to argue that conservative Republicans and Tea Partiers are in the wrong, and poor Democrats and liberals are victims of one-sided abuse, I’m going to have to disagree. If there’s a difference between Republicans and Democrats in this war, it’s not over nobility, but rather over how well each side has played the game. It’s looking more and more like Democrats made a strategic blunder... Though you should not take this too seriously, the structural parallels are amusing, superficial or not.
- rhizome 13y ago
  I'd call it, "contemporary boilerplate rhetoric."

cageface 13y ago

Life very rarely presents us with simple black & white choices, but that doesn't mean that it's not important to make distinctions among distinctly different shades of gray. Don't let party apparatchiks like Gruber fool you with their smoke & mirrors. This is nothing more than an attempt by Apple & Microsoft to accomplish in the courtroom what they have failed to achieve in the marketplace. We have it straight from the Cupertino horse's mouth that this is a "nuclear war" designed to destroy Android. If this succeeds it will set a very dangerous and chilling precedent for the development of any new technology going forward. Anyone that claims to value innovation and opportunity for new ideas should condemn it.

pazimzadeh 13y ago
The idea that Apple is using to go on the offensive because they are "failing in the marketplace" is ridiculous, since extensive patents were touted during the iPhone's 2007 introductory keynote. Also, what evidence is there that Google is still committed to making Android open source even since Andy Rubin left the project? Finally, I don't know enough about Andy Rubin's relationship with Apple, but can somebody who does comment on this? http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/09/apple-to-itc-andy-rubin-got-inspiration.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/09/apple-to-itc-andy-rubin-g...
- icebraining 13y ago
  Also, what evidence is there that Google is still committed to making Android open source even since Andy Rubin left the project? https://android.googlesource.com/platform/art/+/kitkat-release https://android.googlesource.com/platform/art/+/kitkat-relea...
  - pazimzadeh 13y ago
    As I understand it, most of Android's new features are coming in the form of proprietary apps rather than AOSP. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6656764 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6656764
- cageface 13y ago

pearjuice 13y ago

From what I've understood he is actually defending and white knighting Apple's patent trolling. For anyone still in doubt whether Gruber is actively paid by Apple (and possibly others) to deliver viral marketing - here you go.

cromwellian 13y ago

So in Gruber's mind, if someone drops a bomb on your country, and you launch a retaliatory strike, you're just as bad. The timeline here would be instructive. Microsoft and Apple sued and threatened Android OEMs first. Apple's CEO is on record as practicing 'thermonuclear war'. Steve Ballmer gleefully cheered about their patent licensing. Both companies love patents. Jobs "and booooooy have we patented it!" Weaksauce attempt by Gruber at drawing an equivalence.

IBM 13y ago
Gruber is pretty clear about what's in his mind, so there's no need for terrible analogies. >If you want to argue that the whole patent system stinks, and that all of these tech giants are abusing it, I agree. But if you want to argue that Apple and Microsoft are in the wrong, and poor Google and their Android partners are victims of one-sided abuse, I’m going to have to disagree. If there’s a difference between Apple/Microsoft and Google in this war, it’s not over nobility, but rather over how well each side has played the game. These companies pursue what's in their self-interest, and attempts to portray Google as being somehow above it are disingenuous, regardless of how high-minded the PR makes them seem.
- cageface 13y ago
  It would be naive to think that Google doesn't put its own interests first. That's the nature of any public corporation. However, there's a world of difference between corporations competing in the marketplace and winning by providing superior value for the customer and using a patent system pretty much everybody acknowledges is broken to have a second turn at bat after their own product strategies have failed. Until recently there was a gentleman's agreement among the big tech companies that patents weren't to be used offensively. We all suffer when every trivial detail of any software product is open to expensive litigation.
- nileshtrivedi 13y ago
  It's not just PR. You didn't address cromwellian's point at all. His central point is that Apple and Microsoft started the "game". Edit: "Playing the game" too is a terrible analogy for patents lawsuits.

naner 13y ago

The difference between Lodsys and Rockstar is that Lodsys is a bully, suing small (and in some cases, downright tiny) companies that lack the financial wherewithal to fight back. And in fact, when Lodsys’s targets do fight back, Lodsys runs away — settling for nothing in order to avoid a trial. Rockstar may be a patent troll, but they’re a patent troll that at least is picking on someone its own size. Lodsys is _almost_ the antihero here. They are just being exploitative which is dumb and obnoxious. If only they were explicitly attacking Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle's ecosystems. Dishing out the abuse towards their small innocent customers. Using the system these companies have expanded and propped up to really hurt them. And say, "Hey, this is what we are doing. Maybe you should fix this Congress."

suprgeek 13y ago

So Rockstar - an NPE patent Troll by definition - filing lawsuits against Google & Samsung is the same as Motorola filing lawsuits according to Gruber. Except Motorola has - you know - actual products that it sells. Additionally this company was created by the Apple + M.S Cartel explicitly to go after Google and Android - not to create any value, only to harass and stifle a competitor. Sometimes Gruber gets so wrapped up in his own B.S. that he starts defending the scummy actions of Apple - sad.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

weixiyen 13y ago

The patent system is to blame here. Android is shipping on more units than any other OS and Google is going to win if things continue this way based on current trends. They are probably not far away from getting Android to a similar level of polish as iOS within the next few years. There's only so much you can improve on in terms of the OS software before you hit the point of diminishing returns. At this point, the trends are clear, Google will win the mobile OS war. There is really no other likely outcome at this point unless Apple does something drastic. In business, it is pretty much expected that public companies will act in the best interest of its own stakeholders, so this lawsuit was just something that had to happen. You can't blame Apple or Microsoft for this. This is what you do as a business to protect your products and removing your barriers to entry, or you fall off the mobile rocket ship. Also, honest question, but why do people get so upset over this blog? I just looked up John Gruber on Wikipedia and his full time job is maintaining a blog to write about Apple products, with a history of being an "Apple Apologist". We're we expecting him to write something different?