Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 206 posts

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#71

Post by contingencies »

paul7986 wrote: post #23

I had a similar experience with Google; a mutual NDA was signed as seen here https://goo.gl/K9Wd1U . - Feb 2013 created SpeakerBlast; turn multiple devices into one sync speaker via a URL - March 2013 Samsung released the Galaxy 4 with Group Play (same concept as SpeakerBlast) - April 2013 Google/Motorola emails/calls me asking would I sell SpeakerBlast for inclusion into the Moto X - May 2013 Fly out from Baltimore…

Thats funny, after working with most major device manfacturers on digital video for 2 years (2009-2010), I submitted a similar concept to YC in late 2010 but received no reply. My core point was mobile device manufacturers desperately need a USP and this would work nicely combined with some DSP based nearby device playlist remixing and possibly a heartbeat sense and some GPS smarts. You know for shared sports like cycling and jogging and rowing and stuff. Perfect sync not required, since everyone is on earbuds. Vary the music as you go over the hill, the sun sets, tempo manipulation, auto-transitioning between tracks, etc. Would work just as well for smarter playlists while driving. Tech's all there these days, still not aware of anyone who has done it. If you make millions on it wire me 100k. :)

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#73

Post by Normal_gaussian »

rdtsc wrote: post #51
bogomipz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"It's quite plausible his employment contract in "Project X" did say that he would transfer knowledge and ideas in exchange for money." I'm curious about your comment that this is "pretty standard stuff." Do you mean in the context of Google X agreements? Do you transfer intellectual property to them as part of the employment contract? Are you paid a flat fee? Do they pay a "kill" fee if Google X ultimately decides…

In general in employment contracts in technology it seems. Any software written or ideas related to the field of employment get transferred to the employer. In some cases (have read it on HN here) people have successfully modified their employment contract to exclude some of the clauses like that. > Are you paid a flat fee? Do they pay a "kill" fee if Google X ultimately decides not pursue your idea and terminates yo…

I recently turned down a job offer citing an overly broad IP clause. I had a call within minutes offering me a choice of how else it could be worded.

I still turned it down and decided to go freelance instead because the contracts I had read had raised all kinds of personal questions.

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#74

Post by [deleted] »

IncRnd wrote: post #69
paul7986 wrote: post #23

I had a similar experience with Google; a mutual NDA was signed as seen here https://goo.gl/K9Wd1U . - Feb 2013 created SpeakerBlast; turn multiple devices into one sync speaker via a URL - March 2013 Samsung released the Galaxy 4 with Group Play (same concept as SpeakerBlast) - April 2013 Google/Motorola emails/calls me asking would I sell SpeakerBlast for inclusion into the Moto X - May 2013 Fly out from Baltimore…

Did you patent your IP first?

[deleted]

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#75

Post by [deleted] »

paul7986 wrote: post #23

I had a similar experience with Google; a mutual NDA was signed as seen here https://goo.gl/K9Wd1U . - Feb 2013 created SpeakerBlast; turn multiple devices into one sync speaker via a URL - March 2013 Samsung released the Galaxy 4 with Group Play (same concept as SpeakerBlast) - April 2013 Google/Motorola emails/calls me asking would I sell SpeakerBlast for inclusion into the Moto X - May 2013 Fly out from Baltimore…

[deleted]

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#76

Post by fujiters »

>"It’s even worse than just using the proprietary information — they actually then claim ownership through patent applications,” Buether said.

Why didn't Attia patent everything already? He'd been working on it for 50 years.

I suspect Google is really just getting into the building design software space but not using Attia's work and Attia thought he was now a part of any effort by Google in building design software.

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#77

Post by pishpash »

gamesbrainiac wrote: post #12

In simple terms, google baited people with good ideas to join google x labs. Then pursued to cancel the projects, and thus cutting out the people who originated these ideas. Finally, google went on to use these ideas to create their own technology, and some have even graduated from Google X Labs. Basically, evil incubation.

That's simplistic. Why would they go to the trouble of "cutting out the people who originated these ideas" if they are already at X Labs and the project was to continue?

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#79

Post by ocdtrekkie »

Bucephalus355 wrote: post #64
theDoug wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since you asked, it's 11:36pm and I just got home from drinking wine with a friend. I'm making a pastrami sandwich and might fall asleep soon. Can't speak for others, though. Thanks for your curiosity. Thankfully, your honor, most of us are smart enough to know to not play unpaid internet forum lawyer.

Are you going to put the disclaimer though in your post at the bottom?

It's somewhat obvious by the content of his post. (I do actually really appreciate when people do disclose their conflicts here. Thanks to those of you who do.)

theDoug is also not wrong, to be fair. There's no situation in which a Google employee who is not a lawyer publicly commenting on a lawsuit against Google works out well for the employee. Anything he says could get his employer in additional trouble, and as an employee, commenting on a legal case is really, really easy grounds for termination, pretty much anywhere. Whether he agrees with the article or not, nothing he says ends up beneficial to him, so it just makes sense to not comment.

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#80

Post by StanislavPetrov »

pishpash wrote: post #77
gamesbrainiac wrote: post #12

In simple terms, google baited people with good ideas to join google x labs. Then pursued to cancel the projects, and thus cutting out the people who originated these ideas. Finally, google went on to use these ideas to create their own technology, and some have even graduated from Google X Labs. Basically, evil incubation.

That's simplistic. Why would they go to the trouble of "cutting out the people who originated these ideas" if they are already at X Labs and the project was to continue?

Simple, because then they'd have to share the profits with them.
Post reply on HN