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

$4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

betabeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#31

Post by cube13 »

jsnell wrote: post #26
cube13 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nortel has several 4G LTE-related patents in the pool( http://mobile.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/RIM-Not-Goog... ). Those are HUGELY valuable to Apple, RIM, Sony Ericsson and Nokia. I would be very surprised if none of those companies came out with 4G phones in the next year or so. Getting control of the patents can save them a pretty tremendous amount of money on licensing fees. These were probably the ones th…

How exactly would Google owning "several" patents on LTE translate to them being a sole owner of the technology? My understanding is that there are a couple of thousand patents on parts of LTE, with companies like Qualcomm, Nokia or Ericsson controlling hundreds of patents.

Whoops, I meant the patents. Edited to fix my stupidity.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#32

Post by fleitz »

brudgers wrote: post #29
sorbus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google expressed an interest in using the patents defensively, and implied that it would share them with the open source community. If the coalition intends to use the patents offensively, which is very plausible considering the companies involved, then it is not better that it won.

Nations express an interest in obtaining nuclear weapons for peaceful purposes. One side effect of obtaining them is that it limits their neighbor's options when the tanks roll into their back yard. Google is no more benign than any other company.

No kidding, I heard in the spirit of innovation, open source, and allowing consumers to get a better ad display and search experience that Google will soon release it's search algorithms and ad sense code for others to improve on. /snark.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#33

Post by anamax »

sorbus wrote: post #21
monochromatic wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of instances where someone comes up with a good idea, and the only way he is able to monetize it is through patent protection.

If the only way you can make money off of a good idea is by suing other people who are using it, then it's not a good idea.

> If the only way you can make money off of a good idea is by suing other people who are using it, then it's not a good idea.

Huh? It's clearly a valuable idea, otherwise said other people wouldn't be making money by using it. (We can argue about how much of that money is due to other things how much is due to the idea, but let's assume that the idea is somehow essential to to implementation.)

So, what makes it a bad idea? Surely it can't be the existence of a patent held by someone who isn't practicing.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#34

Post by Steko »

inkaudio wrote: post #5
monochromatic wrote: post #2

This article is awfully thin. It doesn't give any argument whatsoever for why software patents are not a good thing. Here's a summary: 1. Google, Microsoft, Apple, RIM, and Sony are willing to pay a lot of money for a bundle of patents, including both software and hardware. 2. Therefore, software patents are evil and a tax on innovation, rabble rabble rabble. It's not much of a syllogism.

The argument is simple, not thin. Instead of spending billions on new R&D, new innovation, these companies have to spend money on the shenanigans of the current software patent system.

The other side of the coin that no one has pointed out yet:

The innovation represented by these patents just made $4.5 billion. That's the definition of rewarding innovation.

"Instead of spending billions on new R&D"

If it was legal for every KIRF to come in and use every other companies innovations there would be much less incentive to invest in R&D to begin with.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#35

Post by cromwellian »

brudgers wrote: post #29
sorbus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google expressed an interest in using the patents defensively, and implied that it would share them with the open source community. If the coalition intends to use the patents offensively, which is very plausible considering the companies involved, then it is not better that it won.

Nations express an interest in obtaining nuclear weapons for peaceful purposes. One side effect of obtaining them is that it limits their neighbor's options when the tanks roll into their back yard. Google is no more benign than any other company.

Really? Then why did Google buy On2's video codec patents and then give them away?

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#36

Post by kjksf »

Steko wrote: post #34
inkaudio wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is simple, not thin. Instead of spending billions on new R&D, new innovation, these companies have to spend money on the shenanigans of the current software patent system.

The other side of the coin that no one has pointed out yet: The innovation represented by these patents just made $4.5 billion. That's the definition of rewarding innovation. "Instead of spending billions on new R&D" If it was legal for every KIRF to come in and use every other companies innovations there would be much less incentive to invest in R&D to begin with.

This money goes to pay the debts of a bankrupt company.

If the patents ("innovation") were so valuable, Nortel wouldn't have gone out of business.

Successful companies can (and have been) successful without patents (or without enforcing patents). Nortel was unable to be successful despite having lots of patents.

Given those facts, the case for patents as a way to "reward" innovation is thin.

There's only a weak correlation between success and patents in that successful companies are forced to pile up patent portfolios, including paying $125k per patent as in this case, not because they care about any of the technology, but because they are afraid of being sued for even greater amounts of money by some other patently rich company.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#37

Post by sehugg »

This Wikipedia article is an interesting read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Patents_Company

It describes a strong-armed patent consortium formed around the turn of the century which controlled filmmaking technology. Indie filmmakers reacted by establishing new operations in a little place called Hollywood.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#38

Post by kjksf »

anamax wrote: post #33
sorbus wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the only way you can make money off of a good idea is by suing other people who are using it, then it's not a good idea.

> If the only way you can make money off of a good idea is by suing other people who are using it, then it's not a good idea. Huh? It's clearly a valuable idea, otherwise said other people wouldn't be making money by using it. (We can argue about how much of that money is due to other things how much is due to the idea, but let's assume that the idea is somehow essential to to implementation.) So, what makes it a bad…

The basis of patent system is a desire to further innovation and not, as you seem to believe, on recognizing inherent value of being paid for having ideas.

If you have an idea and do nothing with it, society is not better off.

If you can prevent other people who had the same idea as you from making products based on them just by describing the idea on a piece of paper and getting government's stamp that you were the first one to come to them with it, then the society is worse off.

The scenario you described is an unintended consequence, or a perversion, of how patent system is supposed to work.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#39

Post by kjksf »

brudgers wrote: post #29
sorbus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google expressed an interest in using the patents defensively, and implied that it would share them with the open source community. If the coalition intends to use the patents offensively, which is very plausible considering the companies involved, then it is not better that it won.

Nations express an interest in obtaining nuclear weapons for peaceful purposes. One side effect of obtaining them is that it limits their neighbor's options when the tanks roll into their back yard. Google is no more benign than any other company.

Actually, based on past history, it is.

As far as I know, Google hasn't sued anyone for violating their patents.

Apple, RIM, Nokia, Microsoft sued plenty of companies in clear attempts to further their already strong position in the market.

Facts contradict your opinions.

Re: $4.5 B. Nortel Bid Shows the Disastrous State of Software Patents

#40

Post by kjksf »

It seems like there is a simple tweak that would make everything better: DOJ should force the "consortium" to allow Google to join at the same price. It seems each company will pay $750 million. Google should be allowed to pay $750 million for the patents as well.

That way Nortel gets more money and Microsoft, Apple and RIM won't be able to torpedo Android with lawsuits (as opposed to doing a better job).

Post reply on HN