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

21–30 of 291 posts

Re: When patents attack Android

#21

Post by yock »

AllenKids wrote: post #12

If the patents were used to block android out of market, then maybe it is harming the consumers. But I see no problem with demanding license fees and maintaining certain feature exclusivity, even that means Android become not so free or less user-friendly. Google does not represent all people and Android has no inherent right to be free.

It isn't the demand for fees, per se, it's the intended result of those fees. Those fees are to be charged at such a rate, a rate practically guaranteed by the monopoly promised by the patent, as to make Android infeasible economically. That behavior is at the very heart of anti-competitive law.

Re: When patents attack Android

#22

Post by hullo »

It's blatantly incorrect to say of Apple (and even Microsoft) that "Instead of competing by building new features or devices, they are fighting through litigation."

Regardless of one's feelings about software patent lawsuits (I'm opposed), a better phrase than "instead of" might be "in addition to".

Re: When patents attack Android

#23

Post by funkah »

I keep seeing this idea that Apple is filing patent lawsuits because they are afraid of their competitors and their business is on the verge of collapse, and I just don't understand. Their business is better than ever, breaking records every quarter. I think maybe people are reading too much into market-share figures, or projecting their wishes onto reality.

Also, did Google not just try to buy the Nortel patents? Weren't they in an auction with the same companies called out in this blog post? I wonder if we would be reading this post at all, had Google won that auction.

Ultimately, patents are not good for our industry, obviously. And if Google manages to bring about change in this area, we will no doubt be the better for it. But it just seems a little funny to strike this "patents are bad" pose when they just bid like $3B for a bunch of 'em.

Re: When patents attack Android

#24

Post by kizel »

jawns wrote: post #4

So ... if Google had won the patents, was their plan to just release them into the wild? Or would they be defending them, just as these other companies are doing?

They seem to be taking a defensive stance. The WebM pool is a step in the right direction.

Interesting to see this blog post on the heels of Google buying 1000 patents from IBM.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/07/29/in-battle-for-patents...

Re: When patents attack Android

#25

Post by nitrogen »

AllenKids wrote: post #12

If the patents were used to block android out of market, then maybe it is harming the consumers. But I see no problem with demanding license fees and maintaining certain feature exclusivity, even that means Android become not so free or less user-friendly. Google does not represent all people and Android has no inherent right to be free.

...Android has no inherent right to be free.

The core idea of Free Software is the notion that one's own creations have every right to be free. If I create something independently, it is my right to give it away for free. Why should some other company I've never heard of and/or never done business with get to charge license fees for something I created myself, without their help?

Re: When patents attack Android

#26

Post by notatoad »

AllenKids wrote: post #12

If the patents were used to block android out of market, then maybe it is harming the consumers. But I see no problem with demanding license fees and maintaining certain feature exclusivity, even that means Android become not so free or less user-friendly. Google does not represent all people and Android has no inherent right to be free.

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 disclosed what patents are being licensed. there's just some vague threat that they have a claim, and you're expected to pay up if you don't want to get sued.

Re: When patents attack Android

#27

Post by mithaler »

davidu wrote: post #3

Drummond is very smart. And he's always been friendly to me. But that's not to be confused with Google being the good guy. They tried to buy these patents and failed. And they claim that they aren't litigious with patents, and they haven't been yet. But to paint them as the victim is disingenuous -- while they don't use patents offensively, they have many other tools at their disposal that they do use offensively, ma…

I don't understand your comment. The OP is about Android being attacked through patents instead of through innovation, and you don't seem to be denying that that's what's happening. The article doesn't claim that "Google is always good", nor even that Google never uses anti-competitive practices. So what exactly are you objecting to? I don't think anyone here needs to be reminded that Google is a business and wants to make money.

Re: When patents attack Android

#28

Post by patrickaljord »

danilocampos wrote: post #14
patrickaljord wrote: post #8

Good to see Google speak out against the patent trolls that Microsoft and Apple are, shame on them. Edit for people downvoting: As I say in my comment below, this is one of the definition of a patent troll according to wikipedia[1]: > Purchases a patent, often from a bankrupt firm, and then sues another company by claiming that one of its products infringes on the purchased patent; This is what Apple and Microsft did…

You have to be careful throwing around the "patent troll" label or it'll lose all meaning. Microsoft and Apple actively ship product. They're playing the patent game but they're also doing real shit that impacts users every day. This is a far cry from the Intellectual Ventures and Lodsyses of the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll#Etymology_and_defi...

> Purchases a patent, often from a bankrupt firm, and then sues another company by claiming that one of its products infringes on the purchased patent;

Re: When patents attack Android

#29

Post by mnutt »

funkah wrote: post #23

I keep seeing this idea that Apple is filing patent lawsuits because they are afraid of their competitors and their business is on the verge of collapse, and I just don't understand. Their business is better than ever, breaking records every quarter. I think maybe people are reading too much into market-share figures, or projecting their wishes onto reality. Also, did Google not just try to buy the Nortel patents? We…

I don't think Google's suggestion that patents are bad is at odds with them trying to buy $3B of them.

Whether or not they like patents, they still have to deal with the effects. They claim that they tried to buy the patents as a defensive move to keep them out of the hands of their competitors.

Re: When patents attack Android

#30

Post by Krylez »

AllenKids wrote: post #12

If the patents were used to block android out of market, then maybe it is harming the consumers. But I see no problem with demanding license fees and maintaining certain feature exclusivity, even that means Android become not so free or less user-friendly. Google does not represent all people and Android has no inherent right to be free.

You make it sound so reasonable. There is a patent gold rush right now. The USPTO is approving thousands of patents that cover the same obvious ideas. Parties that have lost in the marketplace or haven't even participated are effectively taxing the winners by extorting patent fees. Google could pay the fees to the losers and acquire enough patents the reach an equilibrium via mutually assured destruction with their competition, but the market is effectively closed to anyone without the extremely deep pockets.
Post reply on HN