61–70 of 93 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HTC is paying $5 per phone, but they also get protection against Apple. I don't think HTC would've signed the deal with Microsoft, if it wasn't for the Apple lawsuit.
I figure though HTC's profit per phone is likely on the order of $20 or less? (I'm guessing here but I should be in the ballpark.) Thus $5 per phone is hugely significant.
http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/HTC-Droid-Incred...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
notice: everyone is dirty at this game, e.g. google's recent patent application for google doodle "A system provides a periodically changing story line and/or a special event company logo to entice users to access a web page."[1] [1] http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...
Sure, but they have to do this. I only consider it evil once a company starts suing other companies that they know can't compete based on patent portfolio size.
This is wrong on so many levels. If you don't like the process, don't support it. Google is _not_ better than any other company out there. Sure, you have sympathies based on previous encounters and actions, but the goal is the same for every company: Make money.
You're saying that it's different if Google tries to patent something. It's not. There's no moral involved here, this is just plain business. Either you like patents or you don't. Hoping that 'the good guys' apply for lots of patents is crap.
> Most people would say that Google has been more innovative than Microsoft in recent years—especially in the mobile phone market Would they? I don’t think so. Android is iPhone + Symbian + Blackberry + Java. Windows Phone 7 is a new beast.
"The complexity of software and low standards for patent eligibility mean that software engineers produce potentially patentable ideas all the time. [Snip] Auditing 10 million lines of code for compliance with 18,000 patents is an impossible task—especially because the meaning of a patent’s claims are often not clear until after they have been litigated. [Snip] The result is a transfer of wealth from young, growing,…
I'm not sure if the standards are low, rather that the examiners don't abide by the rules set out by the USPTO. Novel and non-obvious are both requirements.
because the meaning of a patent’s claims are often not clear until after they have been litigated
This is another failing of current examiners. The patent should be written such that one skilled in the art could reproduce it. The patents are convoluted and unclear enough that one likely couldn't produce much of what is patented, because its not clear what the invention is. The examiners should make people resubmit patents, under time constraints, so that they are clear. Much like submitting to a journal.
"The complexity of software and low standards for patent eligibility mean that software engineers produce potentially patentable ideas all the time. [Snip] Auditing 10 million lines of code for compliance with 18,000 patents is an impossible task—especially because the meaning of a patent’s claims are often not clear until after they have been litigated. [Snip] The result is a transfer of wealth from young, growing,…
Problem solved.
I was talking to someone who once worked at IBM, and he mentioned that they give a bonus (something like $2000-$5000) for each patent that you receive. He said that employees would get together in small groups and take turns filing patents and sharing the proceeds with the group. IBM, of course, paid for all the fees for filing the patent. Just thought I'd share this random anecdote..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I figure though HTC's profit per phone is likely on the order of $20 or less? (I'm guessing here but I should be in the ballpark.) Thus $5 per phone is hugely significant.
Are you really serious/sure? http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/HTC-Droid-Incred...
We can estimate per phone profit from the quarterly report [1].
- Q1 after-tax profit was NT$14.83bn
- Handset shipment for 1Q was 9.7mn units
~ NT$1500 per phone (~US$55/per phone)
[1] http://www.corpasia.net/taiwan/2498/irwebsite/index.php?mod=...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. If they weren't cashing in on this problem their shareholder's would be pretty pissed and heads would roll.
Should Google do the same thing to Microsoft? Google has shareholders. If they did, I would lose respect for Google that I have already lost for Miscrosoft. Somehow, I don't think Google will, and not just because Windows Mobile is closed source. I think public opinion/brand reputation is an important thing to consider in these types of situations. For example, this poll shows only 32% of people agree with the strate…
Call me naive, but I actually think they try to stay away from playing in the filth even if everyone else is doing it.
"The complexity of software and low standards for patent eligibility mean that software engineers produce potentially patentable ideas all the time. [Snip] Auditing 10 million lines of code for compliance with 18,000 patents is an impossible task—especially because the meaning of a patent’s claims are often not clear until after they have been litigated. [Snip] The result is a transfer of wealth from young, growing,…
low standards for patent eligibility I'm not sure if the standards are low, rather that the examiners don't abide by the rules set out by the USPTO. Novel and non-obvious are both requirements. because the meaning of a patent’s claims are often not clear until after they have been litigated This is another failing of current examiners. The patent should be written such that one skilled in the art could reproduce it.…