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

Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

inc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 302 posts

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#51

Post by lkxijlewlf »

snickerer wrote: post #26

The basic problem I see here is that you don't own the speakers you have bought. My moral point of view is: I bought the thing so I own it. I must be allowed to understand how it works and I decide what it does. I should be able to change the thing's behavior (if I have the skills) and no one else can do that without my order. Buying locked black boxes is bad (for the customers). Buying locked black boxes that change…

That's the world we're moving towards.

I was recently looking at the Opal C1. Looks great. $300 is a bit rich, but the kicker was they want $4/month for the software! Now, maybe the camera will function without it? I dunno, I kinda stopped right there and didn't look further because that turned me off.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#52

Post by Jyaif »

One way around those bullshit patents is to let users program/script their devices, or install whatever software they want.

Also, with good enough AIs we could work around many patents! Users could simply explain the AIs what they want them to do. Even if the action they teach infringe on a patent, nobody would be able to sue them.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#53

Post by zzt123 »

kleiba wrote: post #42

For example, these changes mean you'll no longer be able to control the volume of a group of speakers. Instead, you'll have to change the volume on each individually. It also means you'll no longer be able to use the volume buttons on your phone to control a speaker group. Not here to defend Google, but how can something trivial like that even be patentable?

I bet there’s even a patent for “adjust volumes dynamically per speaker based on real-time positional data to increase volume in a balanced way when possible”. If not, I claim this post demonstrates it’s an obvious thing to implement, so long as the user has their phone or another device equipped with mics on them.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#54

Post by Pxtl »

Well, it's not like Google speakers make any sense even with this behavior. I keep mine generally ungrouped because I have one speaker per room.

When I broadcast "Okay Google, broadcast: Hey, son, what do you want on your burger?" it's not exactly a stellar experience...

It usually goes

1st speaker: Hey, Son wh

2nd speaker: Hey, Son, what do you wan

3,4,5 in overlap: Hey, son, what do you want on your burger

while my son is trying to answer the first one.

I mean, you're all on the same wifi network this isn't really excusable behavior.

So, Google: even with stolen technology you still kinda stink at this.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#55

Post by zzt123 »

nicce wrote: post #50
lkxijlewlf wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument I see often is things like this seem trivial after the fact. But isn't that what computers are supposed to be for; networking and connecting devices so that one can control them easily?

Yes, but is the patent about concept or specific tecnical solution? If it is about the concept, it blows my mind…

One-click buy was a patent so…

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#56

Post by dmitriid »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #44
kleiba wrote: post #42

For example, these changes mean you'll no longer be able to control the volume of a group of speakers. Instead, you'll have to change the volume on each individually. It also means you'll no longer be able to use the volume buttons on your phone to control a speaker group. Not here to defend Google, but how can something trivial like that even be patentable?

The patent office hands them out like candy... "Rounded corners" anyone?

The "rounded corners" narrative needs to die.

It wasn't just rounded corners. It was a combination of design features for a specific device that, among other things, included rounded corners.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#57

Post by Semaphor »

kop316 wrote: post #39
nosianu wrote: post #18

Sorry, but for this link I only get 404 Page Not Found We're sorry for any inconvenience. We can't find the page you're looking for. I would not say anything if it said "blocked for your IP/country", but it appears there is nothing any more behind that link. Was the article removed? EDIT: Ad-blocker (uBlock Origin) off and the page loads. I should have thought of that, there was a flicker of something else before the…

Are you using uMatrix? I had to completely disable any scripts to get it to appear, or else I got a 404.

Oh, wow. Thank you, that worked for me.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#58

Post by charcircuit »

snickerer wrote: post #26

The basic problem I see here is that you don't own the speakers you have bought. My moral point of view is: I bought the thing so I own it. I must be allowed to understand how it works and I decide what it does. I should be able to change the thing's behavior (if I have the skills) and no one else can do that without my order. Buying locked black boxes is bad (for the customers). Buying locked black boxes that change…

>I should be able to change the thing's behavior (if I have the skills)

Sure, but you can't change it to do something that violates someone's patent without licensing it.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#59

Post by strikelaserclaw »

kleiba wrote: post #42

For example, these changes mean you'll no longer be able to control the volume of a group of speakers. Instead, you'll have to change the volume on each individually. It also means you'll no longer be able to use the volume buttons on your phone to control a speaker group. Not here to defend Google, but how can something trivial like that even be patentable?

Kinda crappy but i'm sure google has tons of patents on things we would find trivial as well, as far as i'm concerned, let shitty mega corps duke it out.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#60

Post by mattmcknight »

zaarn wrote: post #27
mattmcknight wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the patent didn't cover adjusting the volume for a group of speakers, why did Google have to disable it? While the patent portfolio did include other things, Google is being forced to disable the basic, obvious feature.

Google is not being forced to disable this feature, Google decided to. They could have paid royalties to Sonos for implementing the feature like they did, after all.

> They could have paid royalties to Sonos for implementing the feature

That's an assumption. You don't know how much Sonos was asking. In addition, companies can choose to not license a patent to their competitors.

Post reply on HN