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

Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 73 posts

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#21

Post by nextparadigms »

eridius wrote: post #17
joebadmo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to learn how defensive patents work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_patent_aggregation It's not just to stop from being sued over that particular patent, but to be able to use that patent to counter-sue when litigated for other patents. Google has yet to use any of its patents offensively.

Google didn't argue that this patent purchase was for defensive reasons. They argued that it was for offensive reasons, that these patents could then be used to attack Google and force licensing fees onto Android. That entire argument is negated by the fact that Google had the option of bidding jointly on the patents and, therefore, having a license to them.

You're saying if Google bought them anyway, it would've meant fewer patents for Google to worry about, but that still wouldn't have been as effective as buying patents that could be used against Microsoft as retaliation.

Google doesn't just want to counter all Microsoft's future patents that they will buy, because that still doesn't change anything. They want to counter Microsoft's old patents, the ones they are using right now.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#22

Post by juiceandjuice »

eridius wrote: post #17
joebadmo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to learn how defensive patents work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_patent_aggregation It's not just to stop from being sued over that particular patent, but to be able to use that patent to counter-sue when litigated for other patents. Google has yet to use any of its patents offensively.

Google didn't argue that this patent purchase was for defensive reasons. They argued that it was for offensive reasons, that these patents could then be used to attack Google and force licensing fees onto Android. That entire argument is negated by the fact that Google had the option of bidding jointly on the patents and, therefore, having a license to them.

Google wanted the patents to fight back against Microsoft, since Microsoft is the one probably leveraging the greatest patent tax against Android devices. A joint ownership of the patents would be useless against Microsof. They could leverage them against Apple, or Oracle, or other parties that didn't own them, however, but even that could be to Microsoft's benefit.

Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer, and the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#23

Post by hn_decay »

kenjackson wrote: post #2

I'm glad Google finally just came out and said it, rather than trying to say, what they said previously, which was that MS and Apple were trying to keep the patents from them. A tip for Google, the truth works better, even if it requires a few more sentences to tell it. On the actual merits though, Google seems to be completely lost in the world of IP tactics. They should have worked to remove all of these patents of…

Came out and said what? This is just providing more detail to exactly what Google said before. Discount whatever second hand noise you've read elsewhere: Google has been very consistent thus far (they derode patents when they made their $900 bid on the Nortel patents, for instance. They didn't learn to hate patents after losing), and this inside detail does in no way change or undermine what they said yesterday.

Microsoft and Apple don't want Google to have defensive patents (patents that both of them know that they infringe on in droves, otherwise they wouldn't be concerned about them).

They should have worked to remove all of these patents off the table as cheaply as possible. The available cash that MS+Apple simply dwarfs what Google has.

Dwarfs is a gross exaggeration. Further both Apple and Microsoft have shareholder responsibility. Microsoft has already made questionable judgment calls to maintain the upper hand -- billions of dollars in patents to make a few hundred million a year in extortion fees, while empowering their own primary competitor (Apple)? It's extraordinary. Apple shareholders are going to start demanding their cash back if it looks like one giant ego pile.

And Google can't quietly buy patents because the people selling want to get as much as possible for it. Well except for IBM who just wanted to stick a gank in Oracle.

The fact that their current IP strategy seems to be to buy IP is absurd.

Many of the patents that Microsoft and Apple are using against Android precede the mobile explosion. They are older companies, having had a long time of big profits to pay people to sit around submitting patent applications.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#24

Post by hn_decay »

kenjackson wrote: post #5
yanw wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have misunderstood the whole thing (if you have even read any of it), they haven't retracted anything nor changed their position. There is no sense in buying patents jointly with Microsoft because then they couldn't use the patents to block Microsoft from extorting handset makers which defeats the whole purpose. It's not about buying patents for the sake of having patents. If any of the reporters had both…

There is no sense in buying patents jointly with Microsoft because then couldn't they use the patent to block Of course not. But you take those patents off the table. It's 7,000 fewer patents you have to deal with. Even under reasonable terms, if MS gets enough patents, they could raise licensing fees such that doing WP over Android is a no-brainer. Now the Android licensing fees are just a nuisance. Also are you act…

>I wouldn't be surprised if Google paid $1M each for the 1,000 IBM patents they bought.

A billion dollar transaction does not happen quietly, and IBM would have no reason to keep it quiet. This was strategic for IBM (which is actually a bizarrely responsible corporation): They have a strategic interest in seeing Google empowered.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#25

Post by pohl »

hn_decay wrote: post #19
eridius wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google didn't argue that this patent purchase was for defensive reasons. They argued that it was for offensive reasons, that these patents could then be used to attack Google and force licensing fees onto Android. That entire argument is negated by the fact that Google had the option of bidding jointly on the patents and, therefore, having a license to them.

Would you mind pointing out where Google made that argument? Because Google didn't make that argument, no matter how terribly M G Sielger may misinterpret it. "They’re doing this by banding together to acquire Novell’s old patents (the “CPTN” group including Microsoft and Apple) and Nortel’s old patents (the “Rockstar” group including Microsoft and Apple), to make sure Google didn’t get them;" That's what Google actu…

...to make sure Google didn’t get them

I haven't been following this closely, but isn't this phrase contradicted by having been invited to be in the band of Rockstars?

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#27

Post by hn_decay »

pohl wrote: post #25
hn_decay wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind pointing out where Google made that argument? Because Google didn't make that argument, no matter how terribly M G Sielger may misinterpret it. "They’re doing this by banding together to acquire Novell’s old patents (the “CPTN” group including Microsoft and Apple) and Nortel’s old patents (the “Rockstar” group including Microsoft and Apple), to make sure Google didn’t get them;" That's what Google actu…

...to make sure Google didn’t get them I haven't been following this closely, but isn't this phrase contradicted by having been invited to be in the band of Rockstars?

Not at all. Microsoft and Apple simply want to make sure that Google has nothing to counter their patent attacks with. They don't want Google to have them. Now Google sharing them with its two biggest antagonist...even footing a part of the bill...no surprise that they don't mind that.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#28

Post by rbanffy »

joebadmo wrote: post #18
eridius wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google didn't argue that this patent purchase was for defensive reasons. They argued that it was for offensive reasons, that these patents could then be used to attack Google and force licensing fees onto Android. That entire argument is negated by the fact that Google had the option of bidding jointly on the patents and, therefore, having a license to them.

They’re doing this by banding together to acquire Novell’s old patents (the “CPTN” group including Microsoft and Apple) and Nortel’s old patents (the “Rockstar” group including Microsoft and Apple), to make sure Google didn’t get them; Microsoft’s objective has been to keep from Google and Android device-makers any patents that might be used to defend against their attacks. Where did they argue that it was for offens…

> Where did they argue that it was for offensive reasons?

And since when a weapon directed at someone who's attacking you is offensive?

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#29

Post by kenjackson »

hn_decay wrote: post #24
kenjackson wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no sense in buying patents jointly with Microsoft because then couldn't they use the patent to block Of course not. But you take those patents off the table. It's 7,000 fewer patents you have to deal with. Even under reasonable terms, if MS gets enough patents, they could raise licensing fees such that doing WP over Android is a no-brainer. Now the Android licensing fees are just a nuisance. Also are you act…

>I wouldn't be surprised if Google paid $1M each for the 1,000 IBM patents they bought. A billion dollar transaction does not happen quietly, and IBM would have no reason to keep it quiet. This was strategic for IBM (which is actually a bizarrely responsible corporation): They have a strategic interest in seeing Google empowered.

A billion dollar transaction does not happen quietly

It wasn't very quiet (that it happened). People think Nokia may have gotten $630M from Apple as licensing fees showed up in the quarterly report. Of course there isn't a line item that says, "From Apple". My point is that people just knew a transaction took place, but didn't know the price. This is the same thing with IBM. Maybe IBM sold for less, but they're not stupid. They could empower Google and get a lot of money at the same time. As you say, IBM is responsible, and responsible companies don't leave money on the table.

Terms of these sorts of private negotations and settlements are usually kept quiet. Often part of the agreement itself.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#30

Post by kenjackson »

hn_decay wrote: post #27
pohl wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...to make sure Google didn’t get them I haven't been following this closely, but isn't this phrase contradicted by having been invited to be in the band of Rockstars?

Not at all. Microsoft and Apple simply want to make sure that Google has nothing to counter their patent attacks with. They don't want Google to have them. Now Google sharing them with its two biggest antagonist...even footing a part of the bill...no surprise that they don't mind that.

That's not what it says though. Drummond said, "Google didn't get them", period. You either get them (which they could have) or you don't. Now you can add to that with additional constraints and rationale, which is what Google did in their update, but it's no longer the same statement. It's not a simple clarification, but a change of statement.

Google tried to give the impression that they were blocked from getting the patents at all. Now they reveal their true motivation, which wasn't a simple "get them", but rather a more nuanced "we wanted to get them, and also have them not get them, so that we could use them against them". I think this is a perfectly valid reason Google gives, but its not what they were trying to evoke in their first blog post. They were trying to tug at heart strings at first -- this update is just kind of like, "Oh, big companies doing what big companies do -- again."

Post reply on HN