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

211–220 of 291 posts

Re: When patents attack Android

#211

Post by aristidb »

Steko wrote: post #103
napierzaza wrote: post #93

Google is lying if they are pretending that Apple and MSFT have started the software patent issues. And they clearly could have tried harder for the Nortel patents if they wanted to. How about try to not just bid a magical number but actually try and win auctions instead? If Google really cared about the issue of PATENTS they'd be putting as much leverage behind changing the patent laws and not just calling sour grap…

The incredible irony is one of the major benefits of patents is "openness" and public disclosure of techniques. The alternative to patents is massive secrecy, sorta like Google's search algorithm.

Can you actually read software patents? To me they're undecipherable. "Openness" isn't worth a lot if it's all written in a language that no actual software developer understands.

Re: When patents attack Android

#212

Post by notatoad »

AllenKids wrote: post #49
notatoad wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're making the mistake of assuming that these patents cover real features or inventions. they don't. they are just pages of incomprehensible text that lawyers use to extort money. should google really be paying licensing fees for "a system and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data"? and in most of microsoft's existing licensing agreements with android vendors, that haven't even…

Then challenge the patents, change the law. I'm not happy with the current system either. But I do not see IP legal actions as all evil, the purpose can be purely to set road blocks for competitors. But as long as it is within the bound of law. After all Android's price barrier is also pretty insurmountable. I'm very skeptical that HTC does not know what Microsoft's been licensing. Others do not, sure.

i agree with you that not all IP action is evil. but the patent system is horribly broken, they grant patents for retarded things and it is nearly impossible to get a stupid patent overturned. it isn't nearly as simple as "challenge the patents, change the law". microsoft and others who abuse the patent system in this way are going to keep doing everything in their power to ensure it stays broken.

and yes, i'm sure HTC knows what they are licensing. but they've signed NDAs as part of their agreement, and microsoft refuses to publicly disclose what patents they think they hold. if google could learn what patents microsoft is charging license fees for, they could potentially write android in a way that didn't infringe on those patents. microsoft doesn't want this. they want android to infringe, so they can continue to collect money off it. this is a malicious abuse of the patent system. there is no other way to describe it.

Re: When patents attack Android

#213

Post by hn_decay »

Steko wrote: post #196
hn_decay wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Literally, I am tired offending the trolls. You spend a good 90% of each of your posts saying nothing of value but instead offending me and pandering to the crowd, desperately trying to drag yourself to some higher ground where your complete lack of facts is overlooked. I hope no one falls for it. >That Stephen Spielburg was able to do it with computer graphics has no bearing on the validity of someone making it exi…

Maybe go look at the actual patent lawsuits against HTC, Samsung et al., they aren't hard to find. Maybe you can submit a copy of Minority Report on DVD as an amicus brief and the judges in those cases will say "oh shit, hn_decay's brilliance hath shone a light where before therewith was only shadow" and declare Android "free and open forever[1]" [1] exceptions apply

>Maybe go look at the actual patent lawsuits against HTC, Samsung et al., they aren't hard to find.

You say so much while saying so little.

Apple's assault on HTC is a perfect demonstration of the failure of the patent system. Dozens of trivial, laughable patents such as "recognize an email address in a string of text", patented decades after such techniques were commonplace. Do you want to show one with actual value, instead of alluding to some great argument foundation that you don't actually have?

Oh, hey, look, Android isn't actually open. Yuk yuk. What relevance does that have, beyond just partisan posturing? Who cares?

You know thousands of patent holders are realizing the potential value of their patents, looking longingly at Apple's $75 billion dollar cash pile (poor guys. Everyone is stealing their stuff). It will be interesting to see how positions change after Apple comes under constant, unrelenting assault. I already see people like Gruber trying to differentiate patents by their holders, which is so ignorant and fanboy-driven that it should embarrass him.

Re: When patents attack Android

#214

Post by notatoad »

econgeeker wrote: post #110
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 a software developer and have been working at startups for 20 years. I am pro-patent because I've seen it successfully used to protect a startup from an evil corporation-- in this case Microsoft. I know the anti-patent people like to pretend that all programmers are anti-patent. I find it shameful to see how shoddy the thinking is when anti-patent people are confronted with pro-patent arguments. I'm an HN member…

i'm pro-patent in the same way you are: i support the theory behind patents, and would be a supporter of a patent system that followed that theory. unfortunately, the modern patent system is so far removed from the theory you are arguing for that it is unrecognizable.

Re: When patents attack Android

#215

Post by worshipGoogle »

Forget Multitouch. Let's talk about how google one day decided to take Java, a project Sun had spent decades developing and selling as a product, and copy it (not necessarily the source code) and give it away for free, in all of it's Google "Don't be Evil" righteousness. Thus causing handset makers who were paying Sun for their product to stop paying them and instead get the free version from Google instead.

Is android a better platform than Java's? Yes, definitely. But that's not the right question. The right question is: was it right for Google to take someone else's IP and give it away for free?

Frankly I hate the way people view Google, as some righteous white-knight out to save the world from having to pay for anything that's worth buying. Instead "just give me all your personal info, and look at a few advertisements, and be on your way" (pat on the head).

I think Oracle has every right to go after Google for hijacking Java and turning it into another add-generating revenue stream, without so much as a tip of the hat to the company that spent decades and billions of dollars building it into what it is today.

Just my $.02.

Re: When patents attack Android

#216

Post by nitrogen »

Steko wrote: post #188
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather ask society if they're better off, because that is the argument that you're trying to make isn't it? That patents are a good idea, not that they're a system that it's easy for individuals to game for financial reward.

That's not an easy question. The alternative to patents is either less innovation (see countries with weak IP protection) or massive secrecy. I don't see either of those as particularly compelling alternatives. Patents need some major reforms but not abolishing.

The alternative to patents is either less innovation (see countries with weak IP protection) or massive secrecy.

I think you'd be hard pressed to prove that weak IP protection leads to less innovation. I'd argue that it's equally as likely that the causation is reversed; that is, countries that do more innovating will eventually have stronger IP protection, whether the actual innovators want it or not.

Massive secrecy is the current state of things even with patents. Patent language rarely discloses any information that would be of use to a software developer. Software developers almost never read patents when implementing their own systems, with a few notable exceptions (such as the case where someone wants to implement a well-known patented algorithm).

Re: When patents attack Android

#217

Post by Steko »

kelnos wrote: post #201
Steko wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok so I'll cite some supporting evidence: http://infochachkie.com/fast-followers-i/ "Whenever creating an imitation of a successful leader, great care must be taken to avoid outright intellectual property infringement; the closer the duplication, the greater the care which must be exercised. MGA Entertainment (MGA), which produced the Bratz dolls, learned this the hard way. Late in 2008, U.S. Courts forced MGA to cea…

Making a blanket statement about all innovators and all followers is an extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary evidence. A reference to a single court case between a pair of companies hardly passes that bar. Regardless, reading your linked article, it seems to have a pretty positive (or at least neutral) view of being a so-called "follower". It's interesting to point out the NKOTB-follower groups like Back…

It seems fairly intuitive to me that innovations are protected by IP so innovators are always for stronger IP protections and wheras followers are always trying to skirt close to the line of infringement without passing it, and thus are disposed towards weaker penalties towards infringement.

I'm surprised at the level of disagreement this assertion has provoked. How much evidence do you really want? Are the Chinese vendors hawking illegal Harry Potter books for or against greater penalties in China for violating IP? Are the fake Apple stores and fake iPhone "KIRF" makers for or against greater IP penalties?

I mean I guess this classification loses value when you start talking about companies like Zynga that both steal and are stolen from (today's injunction). And that probably applies to Apple and many other large businesses but it seems to me that most of these companies put up a fight but ultimately accept that they have to pay for many things -- as Apple did with Amazon's One Click or the IP they buy or the Nokia settlement. OTOH Google seems to have adopted something scarily close to the Chinese pirate model.

Re: When patents attack Android

#218

Post by charlieok »

ConstantineXVI wrote: post #151
charlieok wrote: post #113

I agree that patents are a problem. And, I saw Google's offer today for a free Android phone with a 2-year contract. I would love a deal on a phone, but I think it is unethical to bundle products in this way. I would rather have the opportunity to switch carriers anytime I want. I love mobile devices and mobile services, but the market conditions are too restrictive. I'd like to be able to (for example): o Have multi…

You're more than welcome to forego the contract subsidy to buy a Nexus S (or many other phones) at full price and use it on any GSM network. Nothing stops you from pulling your SIM card out and using it in another device, provided said device supports your carrier's frequencies. The rest of your complaints are the fault of the carriers, not Google or OEMs.

And so I would like to see Google, who are so intent on fighting anti-competitive business practices, throw its weight behind this in their negotiations with carriers, so that they can make such an offer on their home page.

I seem to remember them trying this originally, with the nexus one, and it didn't go very well. But, the nexus one was a mediocre phone and it was relatively early days for android. Now the phones are better, and android's market share greater. I want to see them take this idea seriously again.

But yes, you are right. The real problem in this case is the carriers.

Re: When patents attack Android

#219

Post by davorak »

econgeeker wrote: post #139
hn_decay wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You are not aware of what the multi-touch patents cover, what the inventions are, and you are not aware of what patents are and so you think the movie "minority report" and non-multi-touch touch screens are "prior art". I know exactly what the multitouch patent covers, and yes the basic principals are almost entirely demonstrated in the movie Minority Report. Apple did not invent or have anything to do with multitou…

In order to patent something, you have to reduce it to practice. That is to say, you have to actually make it work, in the real world. That Stephen Spielburg was able to do it with computer graphics has no bearing on the validity of someone making it exist in the real world. The reason I am hesitant to debate this issue is because, as you have amply demonstrated, the anti-patent people often don't even understand wha…

My understanding is that there are several perpetual motion machines patented so while ideally you do have to fulfill your requirement:

"In order to patent something, you have to reduce it to practice. That is to say, you have to actually make it work, in the real world."

In reality you do not, otherwise there would be not patents for perpetual motion.

"Literally, I am tired offending the trolls."

I do not think you are dealing with trolls in this thread. Believing so will probably only block you from understanding and possibly convincing your the person on the other side.

Re: When patents attack Android

#220

Post by jheriko »

i am yet to hear a valid justification for ANY patent. can we just ignore them en masse please? the law will then have to change... at any rate i have zero respect for them. if i invent something already patented, good luck trying to extract money from me... i dare you.
Post reply on HN