As a former insider, I can tell you likely pre-story which might cast a different light on this: * Google employee comes up with an idea. * They go and research the idea to check if there are any already existing companies which do it. * If any are found, they meet and decide if they should buy the company, reinvent the idea, or that it isn't relevant. * If, after investigation it is determined the company's tech isn…
> with a reputation as huge and important as Google's Not trolling: What reputation? Among non-techies, their reputation is one of creepy and spying. Among techies, it's that company that keeps killing loved products. Among developers, it's one of terrible support and awful job interviews. Common to everyone is they are impossible to get hold of, a faceless and heartless machine that makes decisions you can't argue w…
You're living in a bubble if you think Google has a bad reputation; in fact, they're the sixth-most admired company in the world: http://fortune.com/worlds-most-admired-companies/list
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.
I received a one-month contract—teaching, not developing—from a subsidiary of a large education company. I had to consult a lawyer and fight with them for a week over the contract's overly broad IP claims. They basically wanted ownership of teaching ideas I—or my partner (!)—came up with in perpetuity! I eventually got them to change it to my satisfaction, and had a great teaching experience with a cool group of students, but it really soured my relationship with the company and now i can't imagine working with them again.
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…
This is the price of weakening patents. When corporations were afraid of patent holders, this happened less. The great fear was, you infringe a patent, you get shut down. That happened to Kodak when they tried to get into instant photography in violation of Polaroid's patents. Kodak was forced to exit the instant camera business within 30 days and buy back every instant camera they'd sold.
In what way do you think that patents have been weakened? AIA changed to first-to-file, 20 years and added PTAB but how have issued and in force patents been weakened?
As a former insider, I can tell you likely pre-story which might cast a different light on this: * Google employee comes up with an idea. * They go and research the idea to check if there are any already existing companies which do it. * If any are found, they meet and decide if they should buy the company, reinvent the idea, or that it isn't relevant. * If, after investigation it is determined the company's tech isn…
> "clean room" The room can be clean, but what about everything else? There's more to software than the actual written code.
(I'm not being a smart ass, this is an actual question, which is a sad caveat to have to make) does the stuff that isn't code really matter in a court of law? If they went through the steps to "clean" the original viewers, who then wrote up the spec sheet, had that spec sheet reviewed by seperate people, then handed that spec sheet to "clean" engineers, does that work under the law?.... still complete BS, sure, but I'm curious
As a former insider, I can tell you likely pre-story which might cast a different light on this: * Google employee comes up with an idea. * They go and research the idea to check if there are any already existing companies which do it. * If any are found, they meet and decide if they should buy the company, reinvent the idea, or that it isn't relevant. * If, after investigation it is determined the company's tech isn…
This story showed more than meeting or talking though. Agreements of some sort were signed, and he was asked to move out to Google and work with them. Sounds like Google's position is that they did do what was alleged, but that Attia had signed terms that made it legal. What you described above is similar. Legal, but shitty. Some amount of information obtained under false pretenses is surely passed to the "clean room…
Offhand it definitely sounds like the clean room concept basically distills what they want to steal/"reinvent" into a requirement document.
I guess it gives the employees plausible deniability, but the company knows what it's doing.
> with a reputation as huge and important as Google's Not trolling: What reputation? Among non-techies, their reputation is one of creepy and spying. Among techies, it's that company that keeps killing loved products. Among developers, it's one of terrible support and awful job interviews. Common to everyone is they are impossible to get hold of, a faceless and heartless machine that makes decisions you can't argue w…
You're living in a bubble if you think Google has a bad reputation; in fact, they're the sixth-most admired company in the world: http://fortune.com/worlds-most-admired-companies/list
Your source being investor centric aside, IMO a lot of the leftover public goodwill is probably a result their discarded slogan / philosophy of “Don’t be evil”. Just as Google’s behavior has changed over time post motto, so will the general public’s perception. It’ll catch up sooner or later