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

261–270 of 291 posts

Re: When patents attack Android

#261

Post by AllenKids »

azakai wrote: post #230
AllenKids wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because there is no truth in "trivial" and "obvious", there is only value, as in "guilty" and "good".

There is also no objective truth in medicine. But we still let doctors decide what procedures to do, not random people with 'common sense'.

There is no true "healthy", but there is a truth about the state of your bodily function, we just do not know it whole most of times, even doctors. Physically alive and not alive is very objective.

We let doctors do whatever they suggest a lot, we also have the right to refuse medical help if deemed mentally capable. Random people with common sense decide for theirselves.

Re: When patents attack Android

#262

Post by macrael »

grellas wrote: post #133
yanw wrote: post #77

It's sad that pro-patent asstroturf hijacks serious anti-patent discussions on HN, it's obvious that the HN sentiment towards software patents is that of disgust, yet when a passionate and rare post like this makes headlines somehow a pro-patent sentiment creeps out. Software patents are a joke, just listen to this now famous 'This American Life' piece: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/w...…

This piece really is all about the Nortel patents. Google wanted the Nortel patents very badly but couldn't find enough fellow bidders whose interests matched its own to overcome the concerted efforts of Apple, Microsoft, and others who have a stake in pulling Android down. An interesting analysis of who the winners and losers were in this bidding process appears here: http://www.tangible-ip.com/2011/what-does-nortel…

What do you think about the fact that Microsoft council claims the following:

Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no.

https://twitter.com/#!/BradSmi/status/98902130412355585

Why would Google decline to be a part of this consortium? It would have disarmed its competitors.

Re: When patents attack Android

#263

Post by davidu »

moultano wrote: post #249
davidu wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conflating two issues. An individual can be in support of protecting intellectual property and against our current laws that implement said protection.

I agree. I didn't say otherwise. My assertion is that Google's position is still an ethical one even though it is also strategic.

It may be your ethical belief that all patents are bad, but we know it isn't Google's. They have hundreds of patents, a number of which list one of your co-founders as inventors.

So sure, I guess it's nice that in this instance your company's strategy lines up with your ethical beliefs.

Re: When patents attack Android

#264

Post by beerglass »

To put their money where their mouth is, Google should may be put their thousands of patents in the public domain and license it to anyone as per the alternative system they believe is better than the current patents system.

Re: When patents attack Android

#265

Post by [deleted] »

grellas wrote: post #133
yanw wrote: post #77

It's sad that pro-patent asstroturf hijacks serious anti-patent discussions on HN, it's obvious that the HN sentiment towards software patents is that of disgust, yet when a passionate and rare post like this makes headlines somehow a pro-patent sentiment creeps out. Software patents are a joke, just listen to this now famous 'This American Life' piece: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/w...…

This piece really is all about the Nortel patents. Google wanted the Nortel patents very badly but couldn't find enough fellow bidders whose interests matched its own to overcome the concerted efforts of Apple, Microsoft, and others who have a stake in pulling Android down. An interesting analysis of who the winners and losers were in this bidding process appears here: http://www.tangible-ip.com/2011/what-does-nortel…

[deleted]

Re: When patents attack Android

#266

Post by fpgeek »

macrael wrote: post #262
grellas wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This piece really is all about the Nortel patents. Google wanted the Nortel patents very badly but couldn't find enough fellow bidders whose interests matched its own to overcome the concerted efforts of Apple, Microsoft, and others who have a stake in pulling Android down. An interesting analysis of who the winners and losers were in this bidding process appears here: http://www.tangible-ip.com/2011/what-does-nortel…

What do you think about the fact that Microsoft council claims the following: Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no. https://twitter.com/#!/BradSmi/status/98902130412355585 Why would Google decline to be a part of this consortium? It would have disarmed its competitors.

Novell != Nortel

I believe Microsoft was referring to a different patent auction, when Novell was being carved up for parts.

Re: When patents attack Android

#267

Post by kenjackson »

macrael wrote: post #262
grellas wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This piece really is all about the Nortel patents. Google wanted the Nortel patents very badly but couldn't find enough fellow bidders whose interests matched its own to overcome the concerted efforts of Apple, Microsoft, and others who have a stake in pulling Android down. An interesting analysis of who the winners and losers were in this bidding process appears here: http://www.tangible-ip.com/2011/what-does-nortel…

What do you think about the fact that Microsoft council claims the following: Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no. https://twitter.com/#!/BradSmi/status/98902130412355585 Why would Google decline to be a part of this consortium? It would have disarmed its competitors.

My theory is they went in thinking they were willing to spend a lot more money than a consortium. I think they underestimated. And then after realized that being the odd man out put them in a tenuous position.

It's one of those things where people weren't out to get you. But they played their hand so poorly they've made themselves the obvious target.

Curious if the Nortel deal happened in at all the same way.

Re: When patents attack Android

#268

Post by fpgeek »

MrScruff wrote: post #146
hn_decay wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The RIM thing was a giant lie. Remarkable that anyone ever thought it was true, much less would be referencing it now. The random message board commentator, seeking aggrandizement among their fellow fanboys, quickly disappeared and erased their history from the net, worried that their fiction would hold legal consequences. As to Android, it is entirely possible that it went from being a Blackberry clone to instead be…

But Android OS doesn't resemble an iPaq, it resembles iOS. You keep inferring that everything presented in the original iPhone was an obvious extension of what we'd seen before, but it simply wasn't.

Perhaps, you've heard of the obscure little Taiwanese company that built the O2 XDA (the first device to merge a Pocket PC PDA (e.g. iPaq) and a mobile phone with Internet access)?

I believe they're called HTC. They've built tons of phones that resemble an iPaq, plenty of them before the iPhone was launched.

Re: When patents attack Android

#269

Post by fpgeek »

Steko wrote: post #196
hn_decay wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Literally, I am tired offending the trolls. You spend a good 90% of each of your posts saying nothing of value but instead offending me and pandering to the crowd, desperately trying to drag yourself to some higher ground where your complete lack of facts is overlooked. I hope no one falls for it. >That Stephen Spielburg was able to do it with computer graphics has no bearing on the validity of someone making it exi…

Maybe go look at the actual patent lawsuits against HTC, Samsung et al., they aren't hard to find. Maybe you can submit a copy of Minority Report on DVD as an amicus brief and the judges in those cases will say "oh shit, hn_decay's brilliance hath shone a light where before therewith was only shadow" and declare Android "free and open forever[1]" [1] exceptions apply

I did.

Do you really think Apple invented this? http://www.google.com (turning a URL or other recognizable text into a clickable link).

That's one of the patents being asserted against HTC (which has made it past the first round of the process that leads to an import ban).

Re: When patents attack Android

#270

Post by barista »

fpgeek wrote: post #266
macrael wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think about the fact that Microsoft council claims the following: Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no. https://twitter.com/#!/BradSmi/status/98902130412355585 Why would Google decline to be a part of this consortium? It would have disarmed its competitors.

Novell != Nortel I believe Microsoft was referring to a different patent auction, when Novell was being carved up for parts.

obviously a typo.
Post reply on HN