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

41–50 of 291 posts

Re: When patents attack Android

#41

Post by coliveira »

yanw wrote: post #11
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…

Your innuendo doesn't prove any 'anti-competitive' practices, consorting to band a patent cartel in order to strangle opensource on the other hand is.

I don't think that either side is doing the right thing here, but saying that a group is trying to "strangle opensource" is just a distortion of the facts.

Android is just a very small part of the open source ecosystem, and the platform was clearly not created to promote open source, but to use it as leverage to quickly spread a free (as in beer) mobile operating system.

Re: When patents attack Android

#42

Post by tobias3 »

brlewis wrote: post #2

Nice to read a Chief Legal Officer using plain language.

And due to this plain language this reads like a like a declaration of war of Google vs. Microsoft & Apple.

He is accusing them of illegal behaviour. He is accusing them of impeding innovation. And he says they will increase their own weapons arsenal to defend their products as well as fight through other channels.

Due to him being a Google official this means this is officialy a confrontation course. No more diplomacy.

This will be fun to watch. I'm for google :).

Re: When patents attack Android

#43

Post by rufo »

I'm kind of disappointed that the word "reform" doesn't show up anywhere in this article.

Indeed, one of the main courses of action they're taking is to "strengthen our own patent portfolio"…

Re: When patents attack Android

#44

Post by Steko »

watty wrote: post #5
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…

They're being painted as a victim because they are. Patents are BS and continue to hinder innovation. They may be anti-competitive in other areas (although I don't know specifics). Can you provide some sources?

They're "the victim" of patents only because they have chosen to pursue a pattern of willfully infringing on competing companies patents.

Re: When patents attack Android

#45

Post by edwardy20 »

evilswan wrote: post #20

If the "innovations" in Android were already covered by prior patents; they weren't innovations at all, were they? Not necessarily my point of view, but isn't that how patents should work? Protecting prior art.

The patents are so broad that any new invention is likely to be patented already.

Re: When patents attack Android

#46

Post by tzs »

patrickaljord wrote: post #28
danilocampos wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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;

Do you have an example of Apple doing that?

Re: When patents attack Android

#47

Post by mcantelon »

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 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.

Noone's saying their business is on the verge of collapse, just that Android is a strong competitor.

They banned Google Voice (eventually relenting), Google Latitude, and even apps with references to "Android" in the past (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/app-store-craziness-banning-...)... doesn't seem weird they'd use the legal system to strike at their competitor as well.

Re: When patents attack Android

#48

Post by danilocampos »

patrickaljord wrote: post #28
danilocampos wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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;

You left out the rest of the qualifications:

Enforces patents against purported infringers without itself intending to manufacture the patented product or supply the patented service;

Enforces patents but has no manufacturing or research base;

Focuses its efforts solely on enforcing patent rights; or

Asserts patent infringement claims against non-copiers or against a large industry that is composed of non-copiers.

I mean, sure, they respond to one of the criteria any time they buy a patent and later use it in a complaint that includes many patents, both homegrown and acquired. But I think it's reasonable to say that the rest of the criteria are a lot more egregious, especially when a company fits most or all of them.

Re: When patents attack Android

#49

Post by AllenKids »

notatoad wrote: post #26
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…

Then challenge the patents, change the law.

I'm not happy with the current system either. But I do not see IP legal actions as all evil, the purpose can be purely to set road blocks for competitors. But as long as it is within the bound of law. After all Android's price barrier is also pretty insurmountable.

I'm very skeptical that HTC does not know what Microsoft's been licensing. Others do not, sure.

Re: When patents attack Android

#50

Post by slackerIII »

Steko wrote: post #44
watty wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're being painted as a victim because they are. Patents are BS and continue to hinder innovation. They may be anti-competitive in other areas (although I don't know specifics). Can you provide some sources?

They're "the victim" of patents only because they have chosen to pursue a pattern of willfully infringing on competing companies patents.

How do you know it is willful? That is an important word when it comes to patent infringement.
Post reply on HN