Google: Patently Absurd • Hacker News Board

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#141

Post by bonch » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:01 AM UTC

cheald wrote: post #5

I'm not sure how to say this without coming across as incendiary, but what the hell? Is Gruber utterly oblivious to the horrible state of software patents and their abuses? Is he actually condoning the abominable software patents that every other sane developer despises? Yes, Google is trying to ward off being picked to death by a myriad of utterly worthless (in the market, not legal sense) patents. Yes, Google is li…

Brad Smith of Microsoft posted this on Twitter: "Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no."

I think this is just more of Google's double-standards. I think they use issues like this to drum up support from the techie crowds, just like when they talk about openness in spite of bundling Adobe Flash in Chrome or withholding Android source. They know software patents are a big issue on sites like this, and so portraying themselves as the underdog victim is very convenient and beneficial for them.

Literally the only thing Google supporters have in response is to say that they haven't seen Google sue anybody yet, and so therefore Google never will and their motives are benign. I guess if you're willing to put all your trust into gigantic advertising corporations, that feels like a valid viewpoint to take, but not for me.

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#142

Post by fpgeek » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:05 AM UTC

hn_decay wrote: post #66

Lewisham wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to really like Gruber, but he's become a very twisted orator, who seems to bend everything to Apple's favor. Maybe he was always that way, and when Apple was the underdog, it felt more like cheerleading than dishonesty. I felt a decent amount of relief when I dropped him from my RSS reader.

He recently posted a link to a story about Amazon removing the various buy bits from their app, which the snarky commentary "That wasn't hard, was it?" A few hours later he completely changed position to one where he was mildly critical of Apple for making the app less user friendly. I suspect his overwhelming bias just became too strong for even him to bear.

Ouch. That's pretty bad. Do you know if anything captured the change (Google cache, Internet Archive, etc.)?

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#143

Post by fpgeek » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:07 AM UTC

evmar wrote: post #42

joebadmo wrote: post #17

It's weird to me that Gruber claims, like he did in a recent episode of his podcast with Dan Benjamin, that he's not anti-Google. I mean, why deny something that's so self-evident? His arguments here are just so disingenuous. "So if Google had acquired the rights to these patents, that would have been OK." Yes, because Google isn't forming a cartel to stifle competition. "It’s OK for Google to undermine Microsoft’s f…

I think it's a bit unfair to call him willfully dishonest. I find Gruber's writing really fascinating in that he's clearly intelligent but he appears to have no awareness of the way he twists things like this. It seems more likely to me that he is a case study in cognitive dissonance.

I'd look at hn_decay's comment about Gruber's response to the Amazon "buy button removal". That's getting pretty close to willful in my book (especially since he made the change without noting it).

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#144

Post by Toady » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:08 AM UTC

Lewisham wrote: post #40

doe88 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if Google had won the bid and was using these patents (they hadn't developed) defensively to defend against the fact they have violated patents developed by others companies, would it more fair? I don't think so.

No, but you can play "what if" games to death. You can't be slighted as being hypocritical for something you haven't done yet , which is what Gruber is claiming.

Complaining about huge bids that are more than what these bogus patents are worth is pretty hypocritical if you yourself bid over $3 billion for them.

I think Google is whining because they didn't win, and they know communities like this are anti-patent and will automatically side with them if they portray it a certain way. It's hypocritical to complain about the patent system and that competitors won patents you also wanted and were bidding on.

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#145

Post by blutonium » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:11 AM UTC

joebadmo wrote: post #17

It's weird to me that Gruber claims, like he did in a recent episode of his podcast with Dan Benjamin, that he's not anti-Google. I mean, why deny something that's so self-evident? His arguments here are just so disingenuous. "So if Google had acquired the rights to these patents, that would have been OK." Yes, because Google isn't forming a cartel to stifle competition. "It’s OK for Google to undermine Microsoft’s f…

That was Benjamin and Arment, not Gruber.

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#146

Post by fpgeek » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:12 AM UTC

cheald wrote: post #5

I'm not sure how to say this without coming across as incendiary, but what the hell? Is Gruber utterly oblivious to the horrible state of software patents and their abuses? Is he actually condoning the abominable software patents that every other sane developer despises? Yes, Google is trying to ward off being picked to death by a myriad of utterly worthless (in the market, not legal sense) patents. Yes, Google is li…

You're absolutely right. Here's (yet another) example of Hacker News violating one of Apple's patents (as asserted against HTC): http://www.google.com

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#147

Post by fpgeek » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:19 AM UTC

tomerico wrote: post #38

cheald wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one line doesn't really discount the tone of the whole rest of the post. Google supporters claim that Google only wants to use patents defensively. But what exactly does Google need to defend against, if not actual patents Android actually violates? - Also Gruber. The implication is that these are legitimate, unassailable patents that Google has ripped off in some nefarious scheme to steal Apple's good ol' homeg…

The implication is that these are legitimate, unassailable patents that Google has ripped off in some nefarious scheme to steal Apple's good ol' homegrown American hard work I would argue that android "borrowed" a lot from Apple, and that the iPhone was truly innovative in many ways. The question whether they copied too much , or whether Apple's idea were innovative in the first place is what the Patent system is try…

The whole "did Android copy iPhone or not" is beside the point in the patent debate. The patents Apple is asserting against HTC (the only ones that made it past the first round of the ITC process that determines whether Apple can get an import ban) are from the 90s! 1994 and 1996, IIRC.

Can we all at least agree there is nothing innovative that Apple did for the iPhone that dates back over 10 years before it was released?

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#148

Post by fpgeek » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:30 AM UTC

zdw wrote: post #41

The distinction made by Gruber here is between two kinds of companies: - Apple, MS and similar companies who buy patents and actually use them to make products. - The Lodsys's of the world that use them as revenue sources and don't actually contribute any value to anyone. In the blog post, Google is lumping everyone together, whereas Gruber disagrees. Apple's patents that they've used against HTC and similar are for…

Is this unique? http://www.google.comn

That (turning the text of a link into a clickable URL) is precisely one of the patents Apple is asserting against HTC.

If that patent is truly innovative (which it isn't, I'm sure there were web browsers and/or mail readers that did similar things well before the filing date), Google has to worry about the patent situation around Chrome, Mozilla has to worry about the patent situation around Firefox and ...

If Apple wins with such nonsense patents against HTC, wemight as well just shut down the US software industry and send it offshore (like everything else), since there are plenty of jurisdictions that don't recognize these bogus patents.

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#149

Post by fpgeek » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:34 AM UTC

Vexenon wrote: post #7

The one thing I'll agree on with Google: the patent system is flawed ― too bad this is really the only good point (or excuse, I should say) they're using to defend themselves. Then again, Gruber shouldn't be condoning the validity of software patents in the first place, because they suck. Aside from that, I think Gruber hit the nail on the head (though his usage of undermine seemed a bit odd and out of place).

"Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

Once you take away Gruber's presumption that most software patents are valid, the rest of his piece collapses.

Re: Google: Patently Absurd

#150

Post by extension » Thu, Aug 04, 2011, 5:35 AM UTC

danilocampos wrote: post #82

smokeyj wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Predatory pricing exists when you try to take over a market by selling something so cheap, other competitors are driven out This is what happens when innovation threatens dinosaurs. Phrases such as "predatory pricing" exemplifies a fundamental misunderstanding of how pricing works, or markets in general. People forget the whole point of the market is to serve the consumer. The point of the market is not to protect…

> Everything about business is predatory. By that reasoning, Google should have either bought the patents or taken their lumps when they lost, right? If business is inherently predatory, whatever predatory groups wish to form are free to do so in the advancement of their own interests. Why is it for Google to bandy about anticompetitive concerns, crying "DOJ!" but not their competitors?

Competing in a free market is ethical. Abusing a flawed legal system is unethical. Who wins or loses is irrelevant. The issue is who is playing fair and who is cheating.