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

When patents attack Android

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 291 posts

Re: When patents attack Android

#71

Post by AllenKids »

Krylez wrote: post #30
AllenKids wrote: post #12

If the patents were used to block android out of market, then maybe it is harming the consumers. But I see no problem with demanding license fees and maintaining certain feature exclusivity, even that means Android become not so free or less user-friendly. Google does not represent all people and Android has no inherent right to be free.

You make it sound so reasonable. There is a patent gold rush right now. The USPTO is approving thousands of patents that cover the same obvious ideas. Parties that have lost in the marketplace or haven't even participated are effectively taxing the winners by extorting patent fees. Google could pay the fees to the losers and acquire enough patents the reach an equilibrium via mutually assured destruction with their c…

First I hate patent trolls, but the ill effects are financially not that devastating. Trolls do not kill the geese. No geese, no egg.

And then there are the tech giants, they do not notice you until you get real big yourself.

So yeah, the situation sure is depressing, but then again at the end of the tunnel is money and fame, it is only reasonable the path shall be difficult.

Re: When patents attack Android

#72

Post by danilocampos »

patrickaljord wrote: post #60
danilocampos wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You left out the rest of the qualifications: Enforces patents against purported infringers without itself intending to manufacture the patented product or supply the patented service; Enforces patents but has no manufacturing or research base; Focuses its efforts solely on enforcing patent rights; or Asserts patent infringement claims against non-copiers or against a large industry that is composed of non-copiers. I…

You left out the part where it says that a patent troll can be defined by any of these points. Therefore only quoting the one I did was enough to define Microsft and Apple as patent trolls.

But that's obvious. The point here is that patent trolling exists on a spectrum. While Apple and Microsoft may have a tenuous qualification, when I say patent troll most people who follow this stuff will think Nathan Myhrvold, not Steve Jobs.

It's same way that calling both a jaywalker and a burglar criminals just because both have committed acts against the law dilutes the word "criminal."

Re: When patents attack Android

#73

Post by chocopuff »

mithaler wrote: post #27
davidu wrote: post #3

Drummond is very smart. And he's always been friendly to me. But that's not to be confused with Google being the good guy. They tried to buy these patents and failed. And they claim that they aren't litigious with patents, and they haven't been yet. But to paint them as the victim is disingenuous -- while they don't use patents offensively, they have many other tools at their disposal that they do use offensively, ma…

I don't understand your comment. The OP is about Android being attacked through patents instead of through innovation, and you don't seem to be denying that that's what's happening. The article doesn't claim that "Google is always good", nor even that Google never uses anti-competitive practices. So what exactly are you objecting to? I don't think anyone here needs to be reminded that Google is a business and wants t…

The hypocrisy is unbelievable: Google is a major investor in patent troll firm Intellectual Ventures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Ventures

http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2011/05/intellectual-ventur...

Amazon, Apple, Cisco, eBay, Microsoft, etc. are also investors but they are not acting like whiny babies and acting all high and mighty going around preaching about how patents are destroying innovation.

Fact 1:

-------

Google was willing to pay for $3-$4 billion for the same Nortel patents.

Fact 2:

-------

Google's page rank algorithm is patented. if you don't believe in patents then why the hell do you own patents?

Fact 3:

-------

Let me quote another commenter on another blog: "How many small and innovative companies has Google killed off by replicating what they do and making it available for free? Great way to keep the next Google from springing up."

Message to Google:

------------------

You can use other people's technology, you just have to pay for them. You are being sued left and right not because there's some organized propaganda against you, it's because you STOLE from other companies.

Re: When patents attack Android

#74

Post by redthrowaway »

funkah wrote: post #23

I keep seeing this idea that Apple is filing patent lawsuits because they are afraid of their competitors and their business is on the verge of collapse, and I just don't understand. Their business is better than ever, breaking records every quarter. I think maybe people are reading too much into market-share figures, or projecting their wishes onto reality. Also, did Google not just try to buy the Nortel patents? We…

Had Google won the auction, then we likely wouldn't be having this discussion. Google would have had a huge stockpile of patents with which to countersue Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle, the result being a cross-licensing deal where everyone goes back to actually making things. Google's loss created a mismatch in power, so the cartel can sue them without fear of reprisal. It's this mismatch that has led to the current situation of companies competing in the courts instead of the marketplace. Just think: if Microsoft managed to impose another $15/unit licensing fee on Android, would it even be worth their while to try to compete? Why bother with WP7, which is never likely to be the market leader, when you can make more money leeching off Android?

Re: When patents attack Android

#75

Post by chocopuff »

maercsrats wrote: post #64
watty wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're being painted as a victim because they are. Patents are BS and continue to hinder innovation. They may be anti-competitive in other areas (although I don't know specifics). Can you provide some sources?

There is an anti-compete lawsuit going on between google and skyhook: http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/10/internal-emails-reveal-go... There needs to be significant patent/ip reform in this country, there's no question about that. Google isn't necessarily a "good guy", though. There is a lot of money to be made out there and all of the big guys are using everything at their disposal to gain the upper hand.

The hypocrisy is unbelievable:

Google is a major investor in patent troll firm Intellectual Ventures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Ventures

http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2011/05/intellectual-ventur...

Amazon, Apple, Cisco, eBay, Microsoft, etc. are also investors but they are not acting like whiny babies and acting all high and mighty going around preaching about how patents are destroying innovation.

Re: When patents attack Android

#76

Post by danenania »

AllenKids wrote: post #55
nitrogen wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...Android has no inherent right to be free. The core idea of Free Software is the notion that one's own creations have every right to be free. If I create something independently, it is my right to give it away for free. Why should some other company I've never heard of and/or never done business with get to charge license fees for something I created myself, without their help?

See the problem is quite a few companies do not think Android is 100% Google's own creation. Oracle is asking a price for the Java part. Apple does not want its own UI to be a part. And FSM knows what parts Microsoft feels entitled to.

Right, and those companies are full of shit, because Apple's UI is just an amalgamation of shiny icons and features that have been used countless times in countless places--in mobile, the web, standard oses, everywhere. Do they do a great job of packaging all these features together for a good user experience? Certainly. But 'good design' shouldn't be patentable.

Same with Java. Name one feature of Java that hasn't been done 100 times in one form or another in some other language

This is why software patents are absurd. We are all standing on the shoulders of giants.

Re: When patents attack Android

#77

Post by yanw »

It's sad that pro-patent asstroturf hijacks serious anti-patent discussions on HN, it's obvious that the HN sentiment towards software patents is that of disgust, yet when a passionate and rare post like this makes headlines somehow a pro-patent sentiment creeps out.

Software patents are a joke, just listen to this now famous 'This American Life' piece: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/w...

In this case it's so blatantly anti-competitive you have to be blind no to see the problem with it, we have all of Android's competitors consorting together, time and time again to block Google from buying patents so they could kill it.

Even if you are pro-patent (slim chance if you are a HN member) you should appreciate the anti-competitive risk of these patent consortiums. And if the government wasn't infested with IP lawyers (former RIAA, MPAA, BSA; None reformists) this issue would have taken center stage ages ago.

Re: When patents attack Android

#78

Post by raganwald »

patrickaljord wrote: post #63
tzs wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an example of Apple doing that?

Yes, the Nortel and Novel patent acquisition a couple of weeks ago.

How is it that when Google bid for the Nortel patents, it was "defensive," but when Apple won, it was "trolling?"

Perhaps Apple bought them so that Google couldn't use them defensively against Apple's own legitimate patents? Perhaps Apple bought them so that Google couldn't use them offensively against Apple?

I am open to correction, but my understanding is that so far, the only suits Apple has launched against Android manufacturers (not Google!) are with respect to patents Apple has filed itself.

Buying the Nortel patents doesn't mean anything one way or the other until such time as someone files a lawsuit based on one of the Nortel patents. Which is, you must agree, the second part of the definition you quoted, the "and then sues someone for violating one of the purchased patents" part.

Re: When patents attack Android

#79

Post by davidu »

yanw wrote: post #77

It's sad that pro-patent asstroturf hijacks serious anti-patent discussions on HN, it's obvious that the HN sentiment towards software patents is that of disgust, yet when a passionate and rare post like this makes headlines somehow a pro-patent sentiment creeps out. Software patents are a joke, just listen to this now famous 'This American Life' piece: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/w...…

I'm not pro-patent, I just want Google's motives as I see them to be more transparent, and that is what I am aiming to achieve with my comment.

If they thought patents were more strategic for them, they wouldn't be anti-patent. For them it's purely a strategic viewpoint that benefits them due to their current size.

That patents are grossly abused is a serious issue that is quickly coming to a head, so it won't take ages from now for major reform to occur.

Re: When patents attack Android

#80

Post by Steko »

slackerIII wrote: post #50
Steko wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're "the victim" of patents only because they have chosen to pursue a pattern of willfully infringing on competing companies patents.

How do you know it is willful? That is an important word when it comes to patent infringement.

I don't claim to know anything. I assumed it's willful because it's been a repeated pattern of behavior and because of the full court propaganda press they have been making against patents.
Post reply on HN