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

Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 206 posts

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#171

Post by lobotryas »

alehul wrote: post #2

> Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but a judge in the case noted last year that the firm has argued that Attia gave Google rights to his technology “without a condition of later payment.” So Google's defense isn't even that the substance of the accusations are false, but that they had the legal ability to do so? Is this common behavior for Google, if the story is true? This may be naive, b…

The plaintiff's lawyers say that Google has won five out of six similar lawsuits on procedural grounds so looks like pretty common.

As for reputation, why would a behemoth like Google care if they squash a little guy (or two, or a dozen)? Even if they go on a PR offensive they still won't be able to outmatch or shout over Google. At most people like the HN audience will find out and then... proceed to do nothing because Google's products are either ubiquitous (like search) or first-in-class (because they are free, like email).

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#172

Post by lobotryas »

londons_explore wrote: post #122

As a former insider, I can tell you likely pre-story which might cast a different light on this: * Google employee comes up with an idea. * They go and research the idea to check if there are any already existing companies which do it. * If any are found, they meet and decide if they should buy the company, reinvent the idea, or that it isn't relevant. * If, after investigation it is determined the company's tech isn…

Your post doesn't shed a new light on anything. At best, that's the equivalent of a big firm going through deep "technical due diligence" with a startup's technology under the guide of a merger. Then, they tell the startup they are not interested and implement the same tech in-house using a "clean room".

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#173

Post by UncleMeat »

philipov wrote: post #148
drfuchs wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it wasn't the opinion of the editors, but of business leaders; as for the general public, Google still ranks very high: https://www.thebalance.com/retail-brands-with-the-best-reput... and https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2017/02/28/the-w...

2015 - #10 2014 - #14 2013 - #4 2012 - #2 2011 - #1 This looks like a collapsing reputation to me. Perhaps it hasn't fully collapsed yet, but you can see how big a hit it took recently.

Yeah, at this rate they might only be the twentieth most popular brand by 2020! The horror!

This really counts as collapse to you? How many companies would kill to be that widely recognized?

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#174

Post by Animats »

CalChris wrote: post #154
Animats wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the price of weakening patents. When corporations were afraid of patent holders, this happened less. The great fear was, you infringe a patent, you get shut down. That happened to Kodak when they tried to get into instant photography in violation of Polaroid's patents. Kodak was forced to exit the instant camera business within 30 days and buy back every instant camera they'd sold.

In what way do you think that patents have been weakened? AIA changed to first-to-file, 20 years and added PTAB but how have issued and in force patents been weakened?

- Injunctions are much harder to get since eBay v. MercExchange.[1]

- Post-grant proceedings are easy to start and delay enforcement.

[1] https://www.apks.com/en/perspectives/publications/2016/06/20...

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#175

Post by kyrra »

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #156
d0100 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "clean room" The room can be clean, but what about everything else? There's more to software than the actual written code.

(I'm not being a smart ass, this is an actual question, which is a sad caveat to have to make) does the stuff that isn't code really matter in a court of law? If they went through the steps to "clean" the original viewers, who then wrote up the spec sheet, had that spec sheet reviewed by seperate people, then handed that spec sheet to "clean" engineers, does that work under the law?.... still complete BS, sure, but I…

My example. A company I worked for was bought by Cisco. During the vetting period, people from both companies worked together to see if the deal should move forward.

Part of the contract that both sides had to sign included a clause that everyone that was involved in the vetting process could not work on anything related technology wise for 18 months after if the deal fell through. (As Cisco had a competing product already that our company made).

This was more in cisco's favor as they have a full team that does M&A and handles this vetting. So the engineers involved on cisco's side in the vetting would likely not be key engineers on the product.

Large companies are accustomed to isolating people in M&A deals from the rest of the company to be able to prove clean room easily.

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#176

Post by alphonsegaston »

lobotryas wrote: post #172
londons_explore wrote: post #122

As a former insider, I can tell you likely pre-story which might cast a different light on this: * Google employee comes up with an idea. * They go and research the idea to check if there are any already existing companies which do it. * If any are found, they meet and decide if they should buy the company, reinvent the idea, or that it isn't relevant. * If, after investigation it is determined the company's tech isn…

Your post doesn't shed a new light on anything. At best, that's the equivalent of a big firm going through deep "technical due diligence" with a startup's technology under the guide of a merger. Then, they tell the startup they are not interested and implement the same tech in-house using a "clean room".

It sheds light on the captive mindset of someone inside Google. All it takes to get someone to go along with theft and underhandedness is to dress up the whole thing in bureaucratic process.

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#177

Post by vikingmetal »

Just for context, Eli Attia, the architect, is not really the one pursuing the claim against Google here.

A company called Max Sound [1], whose only line of business seems to be suing Google, bought rights to sue over this in May 2014 and then sued Google in Dec 2014 [2]. They seem to have filed at least one other somewhat questionable lawsuit against Google in the past [3].

[1] http://maxd.audio/

[2] http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/newsStoryPopup.go?story...

[3] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-max-sound-google-lawsuit/m...

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#178

Post by walshemj »

659087 wrote: post #167
jamilbk wrote: post #26

The problem with “Don’t be evil” is that evil is subjective.

The problem with "Don't be evil" is that it was nothing but an underhanded PR stunt to begin with.

yes they didn't state if was LE NE or CE they where talking about :-)

Re: Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit

#179

Post by CalChris »

Animats wrote: post #174
CalChris wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way do you think that patents have been weakened? AIA changed to first-to-file, 20 years and added PTAB but how have issued and in force patents been weakened?

- Injunctions are much harder to get since eBay v. MercExchange .[1] - Post-grant proceedings are easy to start and delay enforcement. [1] https://www.apks.com/en/perspectives/publications/2016/06/20...

IPR is relatively inexpensive and quick. They must be filed within 9 months and filing costs are borne by the challenger.

https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/appealing-...

I can't agree that this strictly benefits the challenger. A well funded challenger was going to challenge anyways. This lowers the costs for both sides.

I'll have to read up on the EBay case.

Post reply on HN